[WAD+FIXED] Multiple issues build 1328.15

[rvseydlitz]

The latest build seems to have broken much of the game parts I use for my scenarios.

1- Since version 1.06 introduced "terrain effects-advanced" I have used that and built much of the land portions of scenarios around it...using the {awesome} addition we were provided with there to take full advantage of the cover provided by terrain such as urban, etc. This seems to not work now without drasric slowdowns?

2- Ships , especially but not only- in formations suddenly take {game time} hours to line up on course, In the attached example, NATO TF America ARG and TF 21 Vinson both show this with ships still (game ) hours into transits wagging back and forth unable to maintain formation. In real life, it can take a large ship a bit of time (MAYBE a couple of minutes) to change course, but the ships do not wag back and forth from 270-90 degrees for hours before finally managing to hit a course of 0.
The turns for large ships should be slower, but NOT "wagging back and forth"

3- All BOL appear broken.

4. Ships suddenly can travel on land? In the attached game file, the VZ ships A1 and A2 had orders a few (game) hours ago to go to the Aruba ports Oranjestad and Noord. While looking for their arrival every game hour, I never saw it. Closer examination reveals that one is sitting calmly in the middle of the island...the other is also on land but at least near enough to Noord to perhaps arrive at some point.

Having spent a few years on the overall scenario pack and finally being almost done, at this point I am not sure what to do with it.

Forged Caribean 2024 entire v11x.zip

(3.84 MiB) Downloaded 10 times

[Dimitris]

Hi,

1- Since version 1.06 introduced "terrain effects-advanced" I have used that and built much of the land portions of scenarios around it...using the {awesome} addition we were provided with there to take full advantage of the cover provided by terrain such as urban, etc. This seems to not work now without drasric slowdowns?

This is not something specific to the B1328.15 build; this has been the case ever since this feature was added. We've repeatedly and unambiguously explained that this feature is a major performance killer. Perhaps making this available on CMO-civ was a mistake, since it was originally developed at the behest of pro users.

2- Ships , especially but not only- in formations suddenly take {game time} hours to line up on course, In the attached example, NATO TF America ARG and TF 21 Vinson both show this with ships still (game ) hours into transits wagging back and forth unable to maintain formation. In real life, it can take a large ship a bit of time (MAYBE a couple of minutes) to change course, but the ships do not wag back and forth from 270-90 degrees for hours before finally managing to hit a course of 0.
The turns for large ships should be slower, but NOT "wagging back and forth"

I think this has been fixed in the next update.

3- All BOL appear broken.

Likewise, I think this has been fixed for the first update.

4. Ships suddenly can travel on land? In the attached game file, the VZ ships A1 and A2 had orders a few (game) hours ago to go to the Aruba ports Oranjestad and Noord. While looking for their arrival every game hour, I never saw it. Closer examination reveals that one is sitting calmly in the middle of the island...the other is also on land but at least near enough to Noord to perhaps arrive at some point.

I cannot validate this ATM, but please check again when the next update is made available.

[rvseydlitz]

Ah thanks very much.
On the "terrain features"... I took your reply before as being an issue here. Now looking, I see that it was raised before.

I'm glad that you put it in this version...it probably slows down a few minutes in most of the scenarios I use it in, but if that's the only issue with it, then I'm actually fine. It makes a dimension that adds a lot to your game.
I use ground units as much more than targets...and with that feature they actually have a chance in the proper cover. Without it, they really are just targets.

[rvseydlitz]

Double posted apologies

[ClaudeJ]

(...)
This is not something specific to the B1328.15 build; this has been the case ever since this feature was added. We've repeatedly and unambiguously explained that this feature is a major performance killer. Perhaps making this available on CMO-civ was a mistake, since it was originally developed at the behest of pro users.

Please keep that feature in the CIV version.

In my opinion, Civ users simply need more time to be educated/accustomed.

[DWReese]

I feel the opposite, The feature has merit, but at what cost? The game slows to a snail's pace, and games like that aren't fun to play. The game needs to 'move' or it's like watching paint dry. If this option is responsible for all if the performance issues, then there should be some consideration for dumping this. The civ version should be about playability. There should be a difference between the two versions. I'd love to have a fast-moving game with all of those features, but if you can't have both, then the civ needs to be streamlined.

[thewood1]

Well. It is an option that has to be set. Its default is off.

[DWReese]

It is an option, but I wonder if it has any effect on system performance, even when turned off.

If you go back to 1328.8 (or before) you will see a huge difference in how fast thing work now, whether the feature is turned off or not.

It is my observation that even without the option turned on, the game runs slower and is more sluggish.

The only reason that I bring it up is because it appears to be more work, and requires more effort, than it yields enjoyability. At least that is true for me. That is why it is MY OPINION. Others likely will feel differently.

[thewood1]

It has no impact when off. I've done the benchmarking.

What effects performance from a version that old? How about the continual addition of features and more detailed combat? That all has a price. My performance benchmarking using a scenario I built a couple years ago shows that performance has actually improved significantly. Except in missile combat. With all the real-world physics in missiles, aircraft, and sensors, air combat slows during actual missile combat.

[DWReese]

I'm not arguing with you.

I posted because Dimitris made the statement that since the terrain modification was installed, reports have indicated that it has had the effect of slowing the game down.

I don't know if on/off has anything to do with that as I don't use terrain, so mine is always off. That being said, the game still seems to have slowed down quite a bit since that time (around the time that 1.06 was created). Does that have to do with terrain? I don't know. Does it have to do with 64-bit, or extra gaming things (such as geometric algorithms dealing with interception), or something else? Again, I don't know. The only thing that I do know is that the game has slowed down, even without terrain being activated.

The point of my comment was that if the inclusion of terrain has brought about that many headaches for him, then perhaps abandoning it for the civ version would provide some relief. If it continues to be included, that's fine with me too. I don't really care. Perhaps there are people who use it often. Just because I never hear about it being used doesn't mean that it isn't being used. Again, it makes no difference to me.

But, if something is a pain in the a$$ to program, slows performance, isn't used very much, then it seems like the game might be better off without it. It's just a suggestion. If it's just me that doesn't use it, then mine would be a bad suggestion.

I do believe that playability is the most important thing with a game. If the game is super detailed, but runs at 1 game second taking 3 seconds to play in real time, then that is too slow. In fact, I now try to stay away from large and medium-sized scenarios because the game's performance is either sluggish or slow if I use anything other than small scenarios. Occasionally, the timer doesn't even move at all. Presumably, the program is working through various calculations. I do know that I am not the only person that observes this because I see people posting about performance all of the time.

In my opinion, version 1328.8 seemed to work the best. The calculations seem to all work well, and the game speed was really good. After that, things have changed dramatically. Again, this was just an observation and suggestion.

[Blast33]

Please let's try to find the leak first, before we throw the child away with the bathwater.

I think the terrain is a very nice addition, which I hope stays in the civ CMO. Together with some speed indeed.

[rvseydlitz]

The terrain features pretty much make the game for me once it's a littoral environment. I never liked the Harpoon treatment of land units as simple targets, and CMANO slowly improved that, then CMO..but until this specific feature was added with 1.06, land units still were unrealistically easy to detect and destroy even in terrain such as urban or jungle...it was still almost just using them as targets that could move. 1.06 changed that and now in most of my scenarios I hat involve land units, I use the terrain for cover, for observation posts, Laser designation units, snipers, etc.

I turned it off when Dmitri's mentioned a couple of weeks ago that it was a problem, but that has broken large parts of most of my scenarios as suddenly units that had been carefully placed in cover, were instead instantly spotted and destroyed...hence the reason it was my number one in this post.

[Dimitris]

The terrain features pretty much make the game for me once it's a littoral environment. I never liked the Harpoon treatment of land units as simple targets, and CMANO slowly improved that, then CMO..but until this specific feature was added with 1.06, land units still were unrealistically easy to detect and destroy even in terrain such as urban or jungle...it was still almost just using them as targets that could move. 1.06 changed that and now in most of my scenarios I hat involve land units, I use the terrain for cover, for observation posts, Laser designation units, snipers, etc.

I turned it off when Dmitri's mentioned a couple of weeks ago that it was a problem, but that has broken large parts of most of my scenarios as suddenly units that had been carefully placed in cover, were instead instantly spotted and destroyed...hence the reason it was my number one in this post.

I get where you're coming from, but I suspect this may not necessarily be an either-or situation.

IIRC the overall "Terrain cover effects" feature-set is broken down into the "basic" and "advanced' legs. With the basic "Terrain type effects" feature activated, ground units still get a significant concealment effect and also modifiers against different weapon types (e.g. HE munitions get severely degraded in forests). This was the feature that was included in the original launch of CMO (See here: https://command.matrixgames.com/?p=4982 - section "The lay of the land").

The "Advanced' leg is the more recent addition in CMO v1.06 (see here: https://command.matrixgames.com/?p=5601), and _that_ is the performance killer. It affects mainly the interaction between ground and airborne observers, and models the sharp reduction in spotting distance when there is lots of semi-permeable "stuff" between sensor and target (e.g. ground radar trying to detect a helicopter that is dancing between treelines).

What happens in your scenario if only the basic "Terrain cover effects" feature is active?

[rvseydlitz]

The terrain features pretty much make the game for me once it's a littoral environment. I never liked the Harpoon treatment of land units as simple targets, and CMANO slowly improved that, then CMO..but until this specific feature was added with 1.06, land units still were unrealistically easy to detect and destroy even in terrain such as urban or jungle...it was still almost just using them as targets that could move. 1.06 changed that and now in most of my scenarios I hat involve land units, I use the terrain for cover, for observation posts, Laser designation units, snipers, etc.

I turned it off when Dmitri's mentioned a couple of weeks ago that it was a problem, but that has broken large parts of most of my scenarios as suddenly units that had been carefully placed in cover, were instead instantly spotted and destroyed...hence the reason it was my number one in this post.

I get where you're coming from, but I suspect this may not necessarily be an either-or situation.

IIRC the overall "Terrain cover effects" feature-set is broken down into the "basic" and "advanced' legs. With the basic "Terrain type effects" feature activated, ground units still get a significant concealment effect and also modifiers against different weapon types (e.g. HE munitions get severely degraded in forests). This was the feature that was included in the original launch of CMO (See here: https://command.matrixgames.com/?p=4982 - section "The lay of the land").

The "Advanced' leg is the more recent addition in CMO v1.06 (see here: https://command.matrixgames.com/?p=5601), and _that_ is the performance killer. It affects mainly the interaction between ground and airborne observers, and models the sharp reduction in spotting distance when there is lots of semi-permeable "stuff" between sensor and target (e.g. ground radar trying to detect a helicopter that is dancing between treelines).

What happens in your scenario if only the basic "Terrain cover effects" feature is active?

First ...thank you for the update earlier. I have tested the issues I mention and it appears they were fixed..

Running the basic terrain effects was what I mentioned above...units in urban terrain quickly engaged and destroyed, within less than an hour...where with the advanced on, they can remain in cover until moving and/or firing.

[Dimitris]

Running the basic terrain effects was what I mentioned above...units in urban terrain quickly engaged and destroyed, within less than an hour...where with the advanced on, they can remain in cover until moving and/or firing.

If easy, can you please open a new thread and post a save with an example of this? I'd like to have a look and check why the "basic" leg of the terrain-type feature is not offering sufficient concealment under the right conditions. Thanks.

[rvseydlitz]

Will do.. let me cut out all the other units so it's just the ones involved.
Thank you