Lag: unit scale and graphic settings etc

[CBR]

From what I have seen and heard from others so far, there are big lag issues in MP.

A 3v3 on large settings (a total of 8-9k men) gives horrible lag. Even a 2v2 that worked ok at first turned into a laggy and nearly unplayable experience near the end (memory leak?)

How much of this is caused by bugs/issues with the game? Are we to expect that normal unit size is the only setting that is playable? (normal size means 27 men cav and 40/60 men infantry units)

I have a 2400+ with 1 gig ram and a FX 5900XT graphic card. How many soldiers on lowest graphic settings can I expect to handle without lag?


CBR

[Sp00n]

CBR,

I have a P4 2.6 9800 Pro and 1024ram I can run 2v2 games ok but 3v3 is a waste of time, im running 750 cable internet, tryed lowering graphics settings made no difference at all.

You can all read about when I asked the Activision guy online today about 4v4 or 3v3s, dropping the unit max to the old standard 16 will make a massive difference but half the new community will complain no doubt if this happens.

4v4 games became the staple diet of us all on MTW and Shogun and its a real shame that the new engine is too cpu heavy for multiplayer.

Shocking but true

Sp00n

[FearZeus]

Just for the record...

Time of this report: 10/7/2004, 16:15:14
Machine name:
Operating System: Windows XP Professional (5.1, Build 2600) Service Pack 2 (2600.xpsp_sp2_rtm.040803-2158)
Language: English (Regional Setting: English)
System Manufacturer: FearZeus
System Model: FearZeus
BIOS: BIOS Date: 07/21/03 14:19:48 Ver: 08.00.09
Processor: Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.00GHz (2 CPUs)
Memory: 1022MB RAM
Page File: 273MB used, 2190MB available
Windows Dir: C:\WINDOWS
DirectX Version: DirectX 9.0c (4.09.0000.0904)
DX Setup Parameters: Not found
DxDiag Version: 5.03.2600.2180 32bit Unicode

Card name: HERCULES 3D PROPHET 9800 XT Classic 256MB
Manufacturer: ATI Technologies Inc.
Chip type: RADEON 9800 XT AGP (0x4E4A)
DAC type: Internal DAC(400MHz)
Device Key: Enum\PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_4E4A&SUBSYS_00021681&REV_00
Display Memory: 256.0 MB
Current Mode: 1024 x 768 (32 bit) (85Hz)
Monitor: Plug and Play Monitor
Monitor Max Res: 1600,1200
Driver Name: ati2dvag.dll
Driver Version: 6.14.0010.6476 (English)
DDI Version: 9 (or higher)
Driver Attributes: Final Retail

Description: SB Audigy 2 ZS Audio [DE80]
Default Sound Playback: Yes
Default Voice Playback: Yes
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1102&DEV_0004&SUBSYS_20021102&REV_04
Manufacturer ID: 1
Product ID: 100
Type: WDM
Driver Name: ctaud2k.sys
Driver Version: 5.12.0001.0441 (English)
Driver Attributes: Final Retail
WHQL Logo'd: No
Date and Size: 10/8/2003 10:06:04, 366160 bytes
Other Files:
Driver Provider: Creative

And I Also have ADSL 1 mb supplied by bt, I have the same problems as above but It does not seem to change wether it is 2 v 2 or 3 v 3?

[Puzz3D]

I'm using Win98se an AMD xp2400+ (2.0 GHz) cpu, 256 MB RAM, ATI 9800 Pro 128 MB (Catalyst 4.6 driver) with all graphics settings on minimum and 1024x768 screen size, cable modem internet connection, and 3v3 RTW multiplayer with large units (54 cav, 60 and 80 inf = about 1500 men per army) was very laggy (there were fire arrows in this battle). In a 2v2 with large units, and no fire arrows it started out with some lag, and got progressively worse until it was basically unplayable for the last half of the battle. A 3v3 with normal size units (27 cav, 40 and 60 inf) and no fire arrows, played out with a little lag. In all these battles, I was seeing pretty much all sprite figures because I keep the camera well back and high up.

All 4 online battles that I played went to the end, and remained in sync as far as I could tell. Communication with other players during the battle confirmed that we were seeing the same units in the same positions near the end. The double and triple speed options worked with all players having to activate a higher speed for the game to go faster, but any player able to force a slower speed. I didn't check to see if any player can force a pause. I watched the replay of the 2v2 battle, and it replayed with much less lag than the original online battle, but the replay didn't follow the original battle. The replay was definitely out of sync with the original by the midpoint of the battle.

For me, there is a big difference in unit control between MTW and RTW. In MTW, you can do a lot with groups of units, moving your whole army as a group or moving several lines as groups, but in RTW the gameplay seems shifted to more individual control of units. The only line control I could use with confidence was redrawing the line every time I wanted to move it, and this entailed individually selecting the units in the line or selecting the group and ungrouping them before redrawing the line. I had some success with just clicking ahead of a set of selected but ungrouped units, but I often got unwanted rotations when doing this. All this fighting with the interface takes time that you don't have because units run so fast. There is a lot less feeling of control, and a lot more units standing around doing nothing than I am used to in MTW. If you try to get all 20 units doing something active in RTW, you will basically loose control of the battle. The RPS is quite strong, spears work and archers are very effective and very inexpensive. The overall morale level seemed quite adequate at 8333 denari (25k for 3v3). Many of the better untis are not affordable at 8k. You'll have to go to more money to afford more than one or two of them. There is no tax on units of the same type, and I don't think it's required because the RPS does seem to be strong.

If multiplayer performance could be improved so that battles with large units didn't lag so much as to be practically unplayable, that would be a very nice enhancement to the game. The units fight longer, and you can deploy a longer battleline with some depth to each unit.

[Dionysus9]

I've also had very good 1v1's with larger units.

An individual player can NOT force a pause. The whole in-game time-compression system works surprisingly well.

If lag and control were fixed, the game would be far more playable.

[Puzz3D]

If lag and control were fixed, the game would be far more playable.

Right Dion, and when I look at the petition list I don't see these two things being emhasised. Let's face it, CA is dead set against slowing the game down, so better control is the only way to improve control, and lag is destructive of control because the mouse and camera movements overshoot when the lag is severe.

I can't believe that someone in charge at CA though toggle controls were "better" controls. Toggles completely fly in the face of the idea of using grouped units because all the units in the group are not necessarily in the same state. The gameplay seems greared to individual unit control. Something is going on at CA that has changed the direction of the gameplay from previous installments of the game. Some of the things on the petition list probably have absolutely no chance of being implimented because they are inconsistent with CA's current vision. CA declines to say specifically what their vision is. "Gameplay that makes you feel like you're in a movie like Gladiator or Braveheart" is a statement I've seen, and, if that's it, I can see how "toggle" controls came into being.

Also, you aren't going to need unit tax on more than 4 of one type especially if you intend to fix balance issues by modding. Unit tax is a deteriment in a balanced game, and was only put into MTW as a prophylactic against unbalanced units.

[Sp00n]

Quote

"Let's face it, CA is dead set against slowing the game down, so better control is the only way to improve control, and lag is destructive of control because the mouse and camera movements overshoot when the lag is severe"


We need to get some of these jokers to try and chase foot missiles down with cavalry they are barely catchable, I didnt know Maurice Green was rebreaking 100m records in Total War games these days.

The speed missiles is absolutely silly.

Sp00n

[Dionysus9]

Right Dion, and when I look at the petition list I don't see these two things being emhasised.

Also, you aren't going to need unit tax on more than 4 of one type especially if you intend to fix balance issues by modding. Unit tax is a deteriment in a balanced game, and was only put into MTW as a prophylactic against unbalanced units.

With the de-synching receiving attention and the logon-CTD (seemingly) fixed, the top 2 problems on our old list have been addressed, at least partially.

Control is being moved to the top of the list (or very close), and unit tax is being omitted--since at least yourself and d6 feel it is unnecessary (and detrimental)--and I'm not including anything on the list that "reasonable" minds can differ over. Also, I'm omitting the prioritization in each section--there will be "critical" issues, "very important" "important" and "preferred."

Stuff like game-speed and kill rate, which are moddable and which are clearly a result of the new "vision" won't even be addressed as I feel they detract from our message and make us look "whiney".

I'm not going to give up on the control issue, however, since it is now a top problem in most peoples minds. I'm going back through the list and re-prioritizing the issues based in large part on some of the players' reservations in this thread (and other threads)

Other minor stuff like selectable faction colors (which I understand from the modders would be a major change) may have to wait for a later time, I think.

Right now I am fleshing out each major issue into a paragraph format where an executive could read it and understand why we feel so strongly about each issue.

more later the baby is crying.
*no rest for the wicked*

[AMP]

but it was stated by a high level dev replying to criticism of the demo that "We make the game the way we like it, and hope that the players will like it."

- why would you wanna do that or even say anything like that to your customers? wouldn't it make sense to leave what works just fine alone and add much as possible to the game that your customers are asking for? wouldn't that help build a good reputation and increase sales?


am i missing something here?

[Sp00n]

I agree AMP :) if it was a massive online game with a subscription they would have to listen or the game would die, unfortunately they appear not to listen to the faithful community, many of us who have now been here for over 5 years.

MizuSp00n

[CBR]

Copied this from other thread in Colosseum:

Ok here is a replay of the battle that CrackedAxe and I was in. Its about 8800 men in total.

http://www.mizus.com/hosted/CBR/CBR_lag.rpy

I got about 5 fps most of the time (measured with Fraps) and even with my lowered settings it feels just like it was to play it.


CBR

[Dunhill]

I have played some 2v2 and 1v1 games online (postpatch) and the lag was aty times bad not as oppressive as the prepatch attempts. Obviously we won't be getting nearly the fluidity that we enjoyed in STW.

Can anyone provide a FAQ on the best option settings/internet settings (host upload download and graphics) that have resulted in games with framerates above 25 per sec (my gold standard for online play). Has anyone even seen framerates above 25 per sec?

I'd be interested to hear of the best framerates achieved in a 2v2 game (seemingly our max playable for MP at the moment).

Cheers,

[Puzz3D]

Has anyone even seen framerates above 25 per sec?

I can get 15 to 20 fps watching an MTW/VI v2.01 replay with 8 armies (about 8000 men). An RTW v1.1 replay with 6 armies (about 8000 men) gives me 5 to 6 fps. The best I do in RTW is 30+ fps with two units on the field (200 men). So much for the official claim that RTW is at least as fast as MTW. It's only about 1/3 as fast with 8000 men.

I have AMD xp2400+ (2.0 GHz) cpu, 256 MB pc133 SDRAM running at 266 MHz, ATI 9800 Pro 128 MB RAM, Win98se.