Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

2.0.24759.6

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Thank you dev team. You guys are friggin awesome, and I wish you the best and I hope the company gives you huge raises! The support for this game is pretty awesome and i hope you guys enjoyed/recieved a break around Christmas/New Years. I went to some forum, and i believe this is the 100th-ish patch, so you guys are dedicated to great customer service and making this game wonderful, so once again, thanks for your hard work, keep it up.
 
Right now the reason the turns take too long is because the game runs in debug mod, which gives extended logs when resolving turns.

From a dev on the kerberos forums about the turns:
It can not update during the player's turn as it can interrupt the player's actions (eg: cause lags switching screens because you have to wait for the AI to complete a task, could cause crashes as the AI could get interrupted when the player changes states). Its not like a human player in multiplayer as the other player has a second computer and runs independently from the host.
Just a heads up, I did find another major issue causing the turn updates to be so slow and it will be fixed in the next update (hopefully tomorrow/friday).
Was testing and had a 6 player map on turn 96, hit end turn and it took almost 2 minutes (a little slower as we have a special debug mode that maintains a lot more information to allow us to find the areas of code that causes issues). Then after the fix, the update was 30 seconds...

Thanks,
Click to expand...
 
shadowoak said:
Right now the reason the turns take too long is because the game runs in debug mod, which gives extended logs when resolving turns.

From a dev on the kerberos forums about the turns:
Click to expand...
Uh, what part of that do you interpret as saying that the game as played by people who are not doing Kerberos internal testing are having turn times slowed down by debug mode?
 
Ulzgoroth said:
....I would suggest giving up on the game in that case. And also the TBS genre in general.
Click to expand...

lol, funny

i think that we should all accept that the game was release in a premature state, and the fact that they have released so many patches to improve the game is a testament that the game will be a great game, in given time.

also, the time you spend playing games should be for recreation, 30 seconds isnt that long. before the ai patches they released, i have had times of around 1 minute per turn. if you are that anxious to get to the next turn spend that time thinking of strategies, or maybe play mp. another thing to do is, i will cook meals, play bills, do household chores etc. in the down time between turns so when my wife gets home, i can both have had my game time, and dont have to hear her b***h about our apartment being a mess or nothing getting done............... dont get married......... : )
besides, when u play a game, it should be a game, a time to relax and have fun, so dont be uptight about turn times as i believe they will get better.


on a side note to ulzgoroth, thanks for the advice youve given me, ive read it multiple times and now have a good understanding of lots of concepts of the game. you seem to be level headed, have you ever considered doing a LP on sots2, cuz even before the ai enhancements ive had some troubles defeating them.
 
Ulzgoroth said:
Uh, what part of that do you interpret as saying that the game as played by people who are not doing Kerberos internal testing are having turn times slowed down by debug mode?
Click to expand...

Nevermind, I mixed it up with the patch notes of 2.0.24759.1

castewarkp said:
Critical fixes:
- AI decision-making tuned.
- Fixed an end turn CTD
- UI now handles its memory much better
- Fixed CTD caused by crit hits list
- Fixed CTD on completion of reserves transfer
- Fixed a combat CTD
...

...
Known issues:
- Old Savegames will continue to use old AI algorithms.
- Turn times may be slightly longer as we continue to optimize new AI algorithms.
Click to expand...
 
Show me ONE game that doesn't have something where you have "loading screen" or even times when the game pause to execute something. They are much more noticeable on lower spec for sure but it doesn't meant that all games should be able to respond to something each millisecond while you are using it. Just saying.
 
Tavior said:
Show me ONE game that doesn't have something where you have "loading screen" or even times when the game pause to execute something. They are much more noticeable on lower spec for sure but it doesn't meant that all games should be able to respond to something each millisecond while you are using it. Just saying.
Click to expand...

Of cours every game got a short respons time after you hit "next turn" but with SotS 2 its extrem. We got a game here that starts with 10 sec and goes up to 60 seconds at the end. I did not play more becos my games tends to crash at around 300 rounds.

For the most TBS i playd ( and i play alot) the respons time startet with 1 sec and went up to mayby 30 sec at the end. Thats reasonable.

There is somting wrong with this round times. And ther is no reason to be protectiv about it. Kerberus fuckt up and they know it. I see that the game does not make full use of my CPU for a start. There is room to improvment quad cores are common this days. A game with round times of 30 sec upwards should atleas featur an option to use quad cores.

But i think the reality is different. ITs not like this game needs so mutch resurces. I think ther is somwher a line of badly writen code or somting else that makes it this slow.

And as long as i am not able to play past round 300 becos of crashes or unbearable round times i will complain on this forum about it. In hopes that somone reads my complain and works on the problems. Why? Becos i paid good money for this game even befor launch day. I am one of the poor idiots who preordert the game and paid the full price. And asmutch i am impress with the work Kerberus had done. I will not go all Fanboy and protectiv. I expect them to fix all problems in this game. After all they are not as hopless as EA or other great companies.
 
Nishi said:
hmmm No.

And there are many other TBS that dont take 30 seconds to get to the next round. Imo its broken you can see that when you play in window mode every time i hid "next round" the games says (does not respond) it should not do that.
Click to expand...
I do agree that the entire program shouldn't go unresponsive during turn processing. Though it's not the only program I've seen doing that so I wonder whether there's some screwy reason for it, or whether there's just a surprising amount of poor design out there.
Nishi said:
Of cours every game got a short respons time after you hit "next turn" but with SotS 2 its extrem. We got a game here that starts with 10 sec and goes up to 60 seconds at the end. I did not play more becos my games tends to crash at around 300 rounds.
Click to expand...
Well, crashes need to be reported so they can be fixed. Just about every patch reports at least one crash bug knocked off.

I think I've never seen a really problematic crash in SotS II, but I know others have been less fortunate there.
Nishi said:
For the most TBS i playd ( and i play alot) the respons time startet with 1 sec and went up to mayby 30 sec at the end. Thats reasonable.
Click to expand...
I can't really see a 10-30 second turn break as a killer. Some games go faster. Many of them don't even try to play smart, though.
Nishi said:
There is somting wrong with this round times. And ther is no reason to be protectiv about it. Kerberus fuckt up and they know it. I see that the game does not make full use of my CPU for a start. There is room to improvment quad cores are common this days. A game with round times of 30 sec upwards should atleas featur an option to use quad cores.
Click to expand...
Splitting heavy processing tasks into 4-8 independent threads so that you can make the most of a multicore system is, as far as I know, quite a hard problem. Many programs will only use one core. It isn't ideal but I really don't think 'makes full use of quad core systems' is a feature you should expect of games.

(Though I could naively suggest places where it seems like they ought to be able to multithread but seem not to have.)
Nishi said:
But i think the reality is different. ITs not like this game needs so mutch resurces. I think ther is somwher a line of badly writen code or somting else that makes it this slow.
Click to expand...
There may well be bad internal issues. I would not expect anything as conveniently squash-able as a single bad line of code that will make all the performance issues evaporate though.
 
It is this simple

It is this simple. If the turn time is so long the game is not enjoyable, that is just he way it is. When you hit the turn button and find yourself falling asleep due to boredom because the turn takes so long to process, that is an issue. SOTS1 game turns processed very cleanly and fast. Hit turn, couple of seconds pass, system update. Next turn. You could probably crank our 5 or 6 turns in 30 seconds if you just needed to burn some turns to make some time pass. Many other things about the game are good. But the turn time is unbearable. To state that that you should not play this genre of games if you don't like the turn times is a crock of crap. The first version turns cranked out. Endless Space the turns crank out. Even Masters of Orion 3 which had plenty of flaws, the turns processed way faster and it was easily as deep as this game, if not deeper. So I am not buying your argument.
 
Nearly every video games you listed had far far far simpler combat systems.

It has already been mention many times somewhere else that as soon they start to "tweak" the AI algorithm then you will have lot more "not optimized" codes. I am a code programmer and I have some understanding of what they meant by not optimized.

Image this (I am making this simplified comparison for the general population):

You have a math operation where you want to add all numbers from one up to one hundred. The most simple way, without multiple or divide, is to do 100 adds operation but is not optimized. The answer is 5050 for those who are curious.

The optimized method to get the same result as the manual additional method is to use an algorithm which is known as N * (N + 1) divide by two. You are doing one addition then a multiple then a divide operation which is 97 LESS operation than the pure additional method. See where I am going?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back