Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: KaK3MAW on August 17, 2004, 10:52:27 PM
-
Why does the large map drop frame rates in half. Another
quality of AH game play hit... dont know how many more it can take.
Forget about trying to fight in furball with all thos pretty, useless trees down low.. frame rate dops to single digits for me.
Smaller maps it never goes lower than 25 in worst furball.
GET rid of large maps until you can come out with a quality product or let us play large maps for free
And those of you who ussually have 80+ fr and drop down to 40+ and dont see a difference and say how you love the large maps, i'm happy for you.
I dont think you are the majority.
thanks again HT
-
Thats odd Kak. Something I have yet to experience. Was on line tonight for an hour or so and found no problems. Maybe it was just a bad night for you as far as connect goes?
-
MOrph. if Im not mistaken you are one of the mega FR users?? you m,ight not notice a difference but its there. For my machine it takes a huge game performance hit mjust as it did the only other time we used large map since AH2. I ussually run 50-70 fr
-
i usually run in the 20-40's over an enemy base, full range view 20+ cons in the air.
i can honestly say, i got better FR's tonight on trinity than i was gettin on SFMA before the reset.
i just reformatted my whole HD saturday, and everything on this PC is a fresh install.
dont know why i got the opposite results than you kak, but i did.
dxdiag:
http://home.wi.rr.com/jabostaffelhq/dxdiag.htm
-
I always turn "trees" (the bottom detail slider) to .5 or whatever the lowest setting is unless (and only if) I am looking for GV's. Otherwise, with "trees" full on my FR is cut in half for no benefit whatsoever in air to air.
-
I am running NviDia 440 64mg , only thing I Noticed tonight was the occasional warp or lagg , was getting steady FR of mid to high 20's
-
I didn't have any FR problems tonight either, and my PC doesn't get the uber FR's like some others state. But I limit mine to 60, so I'm not going to see the 90-100+ FRs.
-
I always take about a 15-20 fps hit on Trinity. It's the only MA map that does it to me. Have no idea why.
-
Have the same problem in trinity. I guess the surface (beside the trees) is more detailed. Saw this once by occasion when I changed visual range while in flight and a hunch grew and disappeared according to visual range setting.
Windows 98
ECS K7S5A
256DDR 2100
AMD Athlon 1.2GHz
GeForce FX 5600XT 256DDR
(ForceWare 61.76/Detonator45.23/Omega1.4523)
800x600, Texture 128, Video Setting default
Textures in Video Mem
Soundblaster PCI128 CT4700 (Hardware Acceleration 50%)
-
Maybe the detail keys will help you. On my computer its Shift+ F1 thru F4.\
(Look on ebay you can get parts pretty cheap sometimes. I Upgraded to a +2700 Barton processor and motherboard combo for a hundred bucks)
-
There are three option sliders in the Graphic settings, and four Visibility Range options to be used with it:
*Level of Detail
*Displayed Object Size
*Ground Detail Range
* Full Visibility Range
* Medium Visibility Range
* Short Visibility Range
* Ground Visibility Range
To me, of the three graphics settings, the DOS effects me in the most harsh manner, and then the GDR, and finally the LOD.
I've tested it out with the settings, and so far this is what I have come to believe:
LOD
Despite its name, the Level of Detail slider hardly effects performance at all.
What it does, is effect the level of detail in very minor areas. For one thing, if you increase the LOD it makes the trees look a little larger and more plentiful. It also increases the number of eye-candy background objects seen in the plane selection hangar.
DOS
Displayed Object Size effects the system in the heaviest manner. In a 3-dimenional game like this, portraying an object at long distances become a problem.
For example, there's a building at the horizon. How does the system depict it?
Does the system have to depict the building in full detail, chimneys and cornerstones and all, in a very small scale which the eye cannot perceive anyway?
Or does it use a simplified, modest, 'rounded-out' polygons at long distances, and then switch to more detailed polygons at closer range?
The former method is a system hog, the latter is more economical. When you increase the DOS you move towards the former, when you decrease it you move towards the latter.
GDR
According to visibility range settings the Ground Detail Range may or may not, become a heavy fps impact. I think everyone knows what the GDR does - it chooses the distance which ground object details including trees and stuff, is portrayed. Ground objects - including some field objects, trees, terrain eye-candy(like barns), GVs, bridges, roads... - outside the set GDR range is not portrayed.
Full Visibility Range(Shift+F1)
FVR portrays all objects in the manner set by the graphics settings upto all ranges.
Medium Visibility Range(Shift+F2)
MVR portrays all objects in the manner set by the graphics settings, only at lower altitudes.
Short Visibility Range(Shift+F3)
Ugh.. don't use this one.
Ground Visibility Range(Shift+F4)
GVR is a specialized setting for GVs, which greatly reduces the visibility range of the terrain at SVR levels, but increases GDR(Ground Detail Range) to 4 miles out.
.....
So, if you are using full visibility range with all sliders maxed out... imagine what happens when there's a CV task group attacking an airbase near the shore. This situation is the most appropriate to test out how your system is really dealing with AH2.
The system has to display all of the task group ships in full detail, as well as the town buildings and airfield buildings/objects, at all altitudes and distances(since you are using full visibility range).
The system has to deal with more luscious looking trees, and objects inside the main hangar, which is hardly even visible from the air.
At the same time it has to depict ack fire, flak fire, ground vehicles, smoke, explosion... and above all of that, calculate each of the planes moving.
So, if you set the settings to maintain a fps over 30 in the above situation, then basically it's good enough.
On a scale of 0% to 100%(0% being maximum performance, 100% being maximum detail..):
I set my system at:
* Medium Visibility Range
* LOD 50%
* DOS 0%
* GDR 70%
This gives out very natural results with high visual qualities that doesn't effect performance much. The only 'awkward' moments are when you change altitudes and the trees momentarily 'switch on and off'.