Performance and the future

[Vasiklios]

I want to bring up to discussion this topic,, although I bet it has been discussed continously since Chapter 4 has been announced.

I really like the fun I get playing as a nomad now, but I feel tick performance has only gotten worse. I managed to become the greatest of khans around 950-1000 and the tick performance is already extremely bad in comparison to how it used to be for me. Thinking about the map getting pretty much doubled in size makes me wonder, will we require super pc s to play the game ? Yes I admit my PC is pretty mid, not the best it could be, but I ve always had good performance until now, and with the upcoming East Asia expansion it feels performance is only going to get worse.

 

[Vasiklios]

I have the mention that the game is not unplayable, it plays alright, but I can feel the slight drop in performance.

 

[Cyhort]

Many people, me included, have this same worry. I would hope that if they're going to add another half of the map that they've figured out how to limit performance issues. But part of me worries that with all the people who say they only play three generations at most they might just let it go with the assumption that most people won't be affected by the really bad late game performance issues, since that's where the game tends to get unplayable due to lag.

 

[Emperor 1997]

I have the mention that the game is not unplayable, it plays alright, but I can feel the slight drop in performance.

In terms of Bugs, the Game is unplayable, because for some strange Reasons, Faction Titles, like Peasant Faction are no longer destroyed, after the War, causing the Peasant Leader to keep his Faction Title for Lifetime.

This result in a lot of Duchy-Tier Rulers and yes, the Title gets destroyed, when they die, but the Game can trigger a lot of Peasant Factions.

 

[Brikz159]

Partition the map as a game rule.

Bad computer? No problem, just play the east Asian region, or you could pick Europe, or Africa....

They could partition the map all sorts of ways as a game rule, and we know it works since one guy already does this as a mod with mostly just Europe.

 

[Jia Xu]

The map is not doubling in size. Adding the rest of Asia will increase the size of the map by about 15-20%. Anyway, the developers already said they're increasing the minimum/recommended requirements to run the game.

There's a lot of misconceptions about what minimum and recommended spec even mean so maybe we should clear that up. People think minimum requirements means the minimum to run the game well and that recommended specs are the requirements to run the game perfectly at max. No. Minimum requirements are the requirements to get the game to run at all. Recommended requirements are the requirements to make the game run well.

If you want to play CK3 the way the developers get to play it, you've got to really boost RAM and CPU far beyond the recommended specs.

 

[peteoj]

The map is not doubling in size. Adding the rest of Asia will increase the size of the map by about 15-20%. Anyway, the developers already said they're increasing the minimum/recommended requirements to run the game.

There's a lot of misconceptions about what minimum and recommended spec even mean so maybe we should clear that up. People think minimum requirements means the minimum to run the game well and that recommended specs are the requirements to run the game perfectly at max. No. Minimum requirements are the requirements to get the game to run at all. Recommended requirements are the requirements to make the game run well.

If you want to play CK3 the way the developers get to play it, you've got to really boost RAM and CPU far beyond the recommended specs.

I feel like if you bought a game knowing the system requirements at the time met your specs then it really shouldn't be on you to improve your system to play the game you bought because the devs decided they would add more bloat into the game instead of optimizing it.

 

[Jia Xu]

I feel like if you bought a game knowing the system requirements at the time met your specs then it really shouldn't be on you to improve your system to play the game you bought because the devs decided they would add more bloat into the game instead of optimizing it.

You don't have to improve your system to play the game you bought. You can roll back to older versions of the game at any time. You do have to upgrade your system if your system is bad and you want to enjoy future content. Is it an ideal outcome? No, I wish you didn't have to do this. It does happen, though. A living game that's likely going to go on for 10 years is going to need a little help.

Just a reminder: The biggest performance drop CK3 has ever faced since launch has been the addition of Administrative Government and nothing else comes close. Adding ANYTHING to the game drains performance. Maybe a little, maybe a lot, but it all adds weight onto the engine.

This was an inevitability for a while.

 

[Voidian]

Well, you can complain about performance being bad and possibly being worse in the near future, or you can adapt by placing a steak over your CPU and enjoying your 1 tick per minute with some roasted meat.

The people in this forum are so negative.

 

[Emperor 1997]

You don't have to improve your system to play the game you bought. You can roll back to older versions of the game at any time. You do have to upgrade your system if your system is bad and you want to enjoy future content. Is it an ideal outcome? No, I wish you didn't have to do this. It does happen, though. A living game that's likely going to go on for 10 years is going to need a little help.

Just a reminder: The biggest performance drop CK3 has ever faced since launch has been the addition of Administrative Government and nothing else comes close. Adding ANYTHING to the game drains performance. Maybe a little, maybe a lot, but it all adds weight onto the engine.

This was an inevitability for a while.

The Game is and was never intended to include all of China, but the Devs still think, the Engine can handle it, no the Engine can not handle it at all.
Project Caesar on the other side was build up with this and can handle it, because of this.
Also, Project Caesar has much more better Map, than CK3, because of more Locations, than CK3.

Map Expansions, are always a bad Idea for an running Game, this should be saved for an Successor Game.


And since the 1.16 Patch, I have Issues, I have never had before, like Characters not correctly being loaded, Rulers not getting their starting Courtiers and random Crashes.

Well, you can complain about performance being bad and possibly being worse in the near future, or you can adapt by placing a steak over your CPU and enjoying your 1 tick per minute with some roasted meat.

The people in this forum are so negative.

Would this not result in your CPU being dead, because Hardware does not like to place an Steak on them.

 

[Jia Xu]

The Game is and was never intended to include all of China, but the Devs still think, the Engine can handle it, no the Engine can not handle it at all.
Project Caesar on the other side was build up with this and can handle it, because of this.
Also, Project Caesar has much more better Map, than CK3, because of more Locations, than CK3.

Map Expansions, are always a bad Idea for an running Game, this should be saved for an Successor Game.


And since the 1.16 Patch, I have Issues, I have never had before, like Characters not correctly being loaded, Rulers not getting their starting Courtiers and random Crashes.


Would this not result in your CPU being dead, because Hardware does not like to place an Steak on them.

All of this is objectively wrong and they had plans for China from the start. There has been evidence of it in the game files since launch.

You don't know the code base, you don't know the engine, but you keep making these posts about what the devs can and can't do with it. It just doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

 

[Emperor 1997]

All of this is objectively wrong and they had plans for China from the start. There has been evidence of it in the game files since launch.

You don't know the code base, you don't know the engine, but you keep making these posts about what the devs can and can't do with it. It just doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

It is clear to me, that you don't know the Limitations of the Clausewitz Engine.
The Clausewitz Engine don't like large Numbers, like Characters or Titles.

Look at Stellaris for an Example, there is an Reason, why they change it to Pop Groups, because Pops Groups are less than individual Pops, so a lesser Number of Calculations for the Clausewitz Engine.

And don't come with the Argument, that Stellaris uses an different Engine, than CK3, they both uses Clausewitz Engine, the only difference is, that CK3's uses a more modern Variante of the Clausewitz Engine, but it is still the same Engine, you can not code the Weakness of an Engine away, for this you need a new Engine.

This Engine is more than 15 Years old.

 

[Jia Xu]

It is clear to me, that you don't know the Limitations of the Clausewitz Engine.
The Clausewitz Engine don't like large Numbers, like Characters or Titles.

Look at Stellaris for an Example, there is an Reason, why they change it to Pop Groups, because Pops Groups are less than individual Pops, so a lesser Number of Calculations for the Clausewitz Engine.

And don't come with the Argument, that Stellaris uses an different Engine, than CK3, they both uses Clausewitz Engine, the only difference is, that CK3's uses a more modern Variante of the Clausewitz Engine, but it is still the same Engine, you can not code the Weakness of an Engine away, for this you need a new Engine.

It's clear to me that you don't know anything about Clausewitz. You think every Paradox game is built on the same engine. They are not. Each game has its own version of Clausewitz. They are not the same. The engine is adapted each time to suit the unique needs of each game. You are objectively wrong about all of this. Stellaris and every other PDS game is built on completely different codebases.

 

[SectorsAreOkay]

I can't play anymore because updates over the last year caused performance to suck even at the start of the game. I need to get a new computer, which will help. But it's kind of unfortunate that a game that worked just fine stopped working well because of poor dev work. All software seems to go in this direction. Bloat, inefficiency, resource-intensive for no good reason. Shipping is more important than quality.

 

[Vasiklios]

The map is not doubling in size. Adding the rest of Asia will increase the size of the map by about 15-20%. Anyway, the developers already said they're increasing the minimum/recommended requirements to run the game.

There's a lot of misconceptions about what minimum and recommended spec even mean so maybe we should clear that up. People think minimum requirements means the minimum to run the game well and that recommended specs are the requirements to run the game perfectly at max. No. Minimum requirements are the requirements to get the game to run at all. Recommended requirements are the requirements to make the game run well.

If you want to play CK3 the way the developers get to play it, you've got to really boost RAM and CPU far beyond the recommended specs.

The size of the map is pretty much measured in province amount not the actual pixel size. More provinces = more titles = more characters. Most of East Asia has to be province dense. Besides I don t really have issues, I have a good CPU and 32 GBs of Ram, but the issue is real and it s going to become a reality. The performance issue becomes noticeable late game with large empires and tons or characters, but one or my points was that now as a nomad being the Greatest of Khans I ve conquered half of the world by 1000 and the performance drop feels real, although speed 5 (max hardware speed) is still faster than speed 4 (max fixed amount of speed) but I still have 400 years to go. Now imagine me as Genghis Khan with an Empire stretching from China to Byzantium. By the way the game is and works right now that would reduce the tick speed by a lot.

 

[aadf97799c]

without a severe cut of existing province

performance will suffer greatly

making many current player unable to play at all

there are performance issue even with current dlc

the possibility of paradox rising to the technical challenge is clearly wishful thinking

 

[Jia Xu]

The size of the map is pretty much measured in province amount not the actual pixel size. More provinces = more titles = more characters. Most of East Asia has to be province dense. Besides I don t really have issues, I have a good CPU and 32 GBs of Ram, but the issue is real and it s going to become a reality. The performance issue becomes noticeable late game with large empires and tons or characters, but one or my points was that now as a nomad being the Greatest of Khans I ve conquered half of the world by 1000 and the performance drop feels real, although speed 5 (max hardware speed) is still faster than speed 4 (max fixed amount of speed) but I still have 400 years to go. Now imagine me as Genghis Khan with an Empire stretching from China to Byzantium. By the way the game is and works right now that would reduce the tick speed by a lot.

I mentioned above that EVERYTHING harms performance. Adding provinces harms performance. Adding new governments harms performance. Adding new events harms performance. ANYTHING you add to the game is an extra calculation that the game didn't have to make before.

The argument isn't over whether adding the rest of Asia requires more resources. It does. The argument is over this really ignorant notion that adding provinces is the ONLY thing that harms performance. Anything they could have added in place of Asia would have also drained resources. Once again, the biggest performance drain in CK3's history wasn't provinces, it was a new government type.

Unless you want them to just stop putting out new content, you're going to have to accept that ALL new content drains some performance.

 

[DiabloDeVille]

It's clear to me that you don't know anything about Clausewitz. You think every Paradox game is built on the same engine. They are not. Each game has its own version of Clausewitz. They are not the same. The engine is adapted each time to suit the unique needs of each game. You are objectively wrong about all of this. Stellaris and every other PDS game is built on completely different codebases.

You accuse people of being objectively wrong, when he anticipated what you were going to say, and answered you?

And don't come with the Argument, that Stellaris uses an different Engine, than CK3, they both uses Clausewitz Engine, the only difference is, that CK3's uses a more modern Variante of the Clausewitz Engine, but it is still the same Engine, you can not code the Weakness of an Engine away, for this you need a new Engine.

This Engine is more than 15 Years oold.

"Adapted each time" and "more modern variant" sound the same.

In terms of Bugs, the Game is unplayable, because for some strange Reasons, Faction Titles, like Peasant Faction are no longer destroyed, after the War, causing the Peasant Leader to keep his Faction Title for Lifetime.

This result in a lot of Duchy-Tier Rulers and yes, the Title gets destroyed, when they die, but the Game can trigger a lot of Peasant Factions.

I always wondered why mid game you start seeing a tonne of peasant factions at peace to marry.

The map is not doubling in size. Adding the rest of Asia will increase the size of the map by about 15-20%.

So will that be 15-20% more crashes? Given how crash happy just the khans of the steppe dlc is

Anyway, the developers already said they're increasing the minimum/recommended requirements to run the ggame.

So admitting it'll run far far worse. Even reccomended specs will get you a laggy game during crusades, or admin realms. My specs are sbove reccomended and yet it still goes to a crawl at auto save time

There's a lot of misconceptions about what minimum and recommended spec even mean so maybe we should clear that up. People think minimum requirements means the minimum to run the game well and that recommended specs are the requirements to run the game perfectly at max. No. Minimum requirements are the requirements to get the game to run at all. Recommended requirements are the requirements to make the game run well.

But if its not running well at reccomended, what does that mean? Skyrim can technically be played on a computer from the 90s, so minimum can be even lower sometimes

If you want to play CK3 the way the developers get to play it, you've got to really boost RAM and CPU far beyond the recommended specs.

 

[Jia Xu]

You accuse people of being objectively wrong, when he anticipated what you were going to say, and answered you?

"Adapted each time" and "more modern variant" sound the same.

I always wondered why mid game you start seeing a tonne of peasant factions at peace to marry.

So will that be 15-20% more crashes? Given how crash happy just the khans of the steppe dlc is

So admitting it'll run far far worse. Even reccomended specs will get you a laggy game during crusades, or admin realms. My specs are sbove reccomended and yet it still goes to a crawl at auto save time

But if its not running well at reccomended, what does that mean? Skyrim can technically be played on a computer from the 90s, so minimum can be even lower sometimes

Yes, it is objectively wrong. Calling CK3's engine 15 years old implies it is the same engine from 15 years ago. It's just not true. It's like saying games on Unreal Engine 1 and Unreal Engine 5 are on the same engine. It's a brand. lol

No one can predict your crashes. CK3 is very stable for me but for other people that might not be so. Everyone's computer handles video games a little differently.

You can ignore min/rec specifications if you want but if you do, you're taking your life into your own hands. The devs can't predict what will happen if you ignore their instructions.

Again, there's no way to avoid continued performance drops over the coming years unless you want them to make no new content at all.

 

[Slaughter]

I've been wanting to address this since Khans of the Steppe released.

Performance has definitively suffered. Sure, it suffered since Roads to Power, but Khans of the Steppe is definitively even worse. I used to get around 60º temps in my laptop for Roads to Power, I now get 60-70º for Khans of the Steppe, I've even seen it peak to 80 for a few moments.

I'm going to be real: This game can't take another performance hit. China is going to make the game unplayable to part of the playerbase, and that's simply unnaceptable. Even I am in doubt if my laptop will be able to take on All Under Heaven and not melt.

Paradox needs to take a step back and optimize optimize optimize. Simple as that.

I believe the engine CAN take East Asia, just like CKII's engine managed to take the map expansion.

IF Paradox puts in some serious optimization work.