AI turns are very long

[aesopo]

Am I the only person having a problem with AI turns - 3-5 minutes each turn is really making this game unplayable. Does anyone else have a problem with this?

I am playing on an AMD turon x2 laptop, with 7600 Geoforce 512 card, and 2 gig ram at 667mhz.

Is it just me?[:@]

[zook08]

No, that's normal when playing large scenarios.

[seille]

What is the size of map and number of AI players ?

edit:
When you have these problems on a 20x20 map against one AI it´s NOT normal.
On huge maps it is.

[Vic]

And 667 mhz? thats very slow.
 
kind regards,
Vic

[zook08]

For RAM, it's pretty good.

[panzers]

You have no problem at all with the ram, but, I would update the video card to something more like the geforce 8600GT.
They're gegining to get a lot cheaper now that they have an upgrade for that. You can probably get it for something like $129.99 at best buy or something
You might even be able to get the overclocked edition of that card.

[Vic]

@zook08,
 
oops. good point. i should pay more attention.
 
anyway i agree with seille, its probably due to playing a very large map with lots of AI opponents.
 
kind regards,
Vic

[seille]

I played AT during alpha and beta test on my old system with a old Athlon XP 2300
and a Radeon 9600 Pro. It was good playable.
Now i have a Dual Core CPU and a Geforce 8800 GTS
and it´s not much faster.
But to be honest i never played very big games against CPU. The biggest
was probably "End of a Union" against two CPU´s.
The breaks for calculating the AI turns has been ok for me. It was not too long.
And i´m not very patient [:D]
 
The guy´s who post their "AI turns need too much time" should post not only their hardware configuration
but also their scenario setup. Maybe it´s software in the background that slows AT down sometimes ?

[rmielech]

ORIGINAL: panzers

You have no problem at all with the ram, but, I would update the video card to something more like the geforce 8600GT.

I wouldn't think an upgraded video card matters much in this type of program and situation.

[aesopo]

I was playing WAW v30 and also the ardennes situation. This really bugs me and makes this game unplayable as such. Does anyone have the patience tp sit down for an hour to just get 8 or 10 rds done? Sorry to say this, the AI routine should have been sped up.

[rickier65]

ORIGINAL: aesopo

I was playing WAW v30 and also the ardennes situation. This really bugs me and makes this game unplayable as such. Does anyone have the patience tp sit down for an hour to just get 8 or 10 rds done? Sorry to say this, the AI routine should have been sped up.

I'm playing WaWv30 against the AI. But it's still early in game and so far only the West AI is active, but turns AI turns arnt taking too long yet. Even if they increased to 5-10 minutes, well, I know I take longer than that, and If I were playing a another person, I know they would take longer, so I guess a 5-10 mintue wait is ok. (Naturally, it would be nice to have instant result, but then I wouldn't want to sacrifice quality of the AI at all).

When it gets to the point where it's noticeable, I'll crack open a book, or any number of other things that always need attention.

I can live with it.

Rick

[JAMiAM]

ORIGINAL: aesopo

I was playing WAW v30 and also the ardennes situation. This really bugs me and makes this game unplayable as such. Does anyone have the patience tp sit down for an hour to just get 8 or 10 rds done? Sorry to say this, the AI routine should have been sped up.

Let me see if I understand this complaint...

You're complaining that you're only getting 8-10 rds of WaW v30 done in an hour?

Hell...if you spend less than an hour on anything after the first nine rounds of this scenario you're going to get your ass handed to you in a PBEM game. Mid-game turns generally take me a couple to three hours to play.

Somethings in life are meant to be taken slowly and savored. Monkey-jerking your...turns to get them done as fast as possible is not what this game's about...

I do understand the lack of visual stimulation while the AI is taking its turn, but one could always take the time to pry their sweaty rumps out of the chair and shake some fresh air between their cheeks once in a while. Visit the other members of the family. Take a potty break. Grab a drink of water. Do some jumping jacks. Surf the web.

All IMHO, of course. Your mileage may vary.

[Magpius]

Hell...if you spend less than an hour on anything after the first nine rounds of this scenario you're going to get your ass handed to you in a PBEM game.

Unfortunately I can fully endorse the above, and not just about WAW. [:(]
Try playing a chess game set to max and see how long the turns take

[hazxan]

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM
I do understand the lack of visual stimulation while the AI is taking its turn, but one could always take the time to pry their sweaty rumps out of the chair and shake some fresh air between their cheeks once in a while. Visit the other members of the family. Take a potty break. Grab a drink of water. Do some jumping jacks. Surf the web.

Or write patronising messages to forums, perhaps?[8|]

I'm actually agreeing with you. The other thing is that none of the alternative activities you suggest require you to waste time and money you will never get back. I can do all of those activities without having bought AT at all!!!!! Even better, other members of my family don't freeze up for 5 minutes in mid-conversation. When I turn the tap on, it doesn't pause after every 50 millilitres. When I read a book, I don't have to wait for 5 minutes for a page to turn...

Eventually I found a satisfactory alternative. Basically, instead of AT I play strategy games that don't spend so much time displaying an empty screen. That's more-or-less every other game out there, so there's plenty of choice.

[Joshuatree]

"Eventually I found a satisfactory alternative. Basically, instead of AT I play strategy games that don't spend so much time displaying an empty screen. That's more-or-less every other game out there, so there's plenty of choice."
 
Exactly. Good point. Now some gamers, including me, can live with it, it surely scares away potential buyers of the game. I'm sure Vic will adress this "problem" at some point in the future. 

[zukhov]

I recently replaced my PC (to a Gatway FX7020) with an AMD Phenom 9600 Quad-Core processor running at 2.3 GHz. It has 3 GB of RAM, and is running a 32-bit version of Vista Home premium. On a 60x60 map with 2 opponents (1 People's Army AI, 1 Regular AI) with logging enabled it is taking approximately 1 minute and 21 seconds per computer turn. The system also came with a 24 inch monitor, which allows for a nice wide view of the battlefield. The smoking video card this thing has is not related to this performance.

Programmatically, I can think of some interesting things that could be done instead of the blank screen that would be in excess of the sounds but less CPU intensive than the active battle. If I was Vic, however, I'd be working on a Modern warfare upgraded version of this game and sell it as an upgrade to existing owners or standalone for new customers.

Regards, Lordkarg

[aesopo]

That's the main point. The game has a lot of good points to it but really the AI process has turned me off from playing it anymore (a lot of my purchases from matrix have been equally disappointing).

[Vic]

@aesop

The Ardennes AI should finish its turn in around a minute or so on a minimum spec system. I think thats acceptable.

The WaW map is a very large map with a lot of units and indeed takes longer. Even on a good system it can eventually take more then 5 minutes.

But there are a lot of scenarios like Ardennes and even a lot smaller included. Those have increasingly smaller AI processing times.

But i did not want to prohibit players from playing larger scenarios.. by for example maximizing the random map to 50x50. so yes you can setup scenarios that have a long wait. Also some of them have been included like WoW.

But if you dont like waiting please pick smaller scenarios like the even stevens, ladder games, some of the fictional ones, Afrika Korps... they should be realy fast in AI processing time. 

@Lord
And AI of AT only uses one thread, ie one processor of for example a dual or quad core.

kind regards,
Vic

[zukhov]

I was curious about the threading so thanks for the info.  I program in VB.NET part-time professionally and am clueless as to how to effectively design threading into an application.  I *AM* seeing a major performance improvement over my high-end single core Athalon with 2GB or memory.  Not sure why.  Perhaps the performance improvments are due to the CPU cache design and motherboard.  The multi-core is a pure win as it is keeping Vista serviced and out of the way.  In any event, 60 x 60 maps are working out fine as long as 1.25 minutes is an acceptable wait.
 
Regards, Lordkarg

[Vic]

ORIGINAL: Lord Karg

I was curious about the threading so thanks for the info.  I program in VB.NET part-time professionally and am clueless as to how to effectively design threading into an application.  I *AM* seeing a major performance improvement over my high-end single core Athalon with 2GB or memory.  Not sure why.  Perhaps the performance improvments are due to the CPU cache design and motherboard.  The multi-core is a pure win as it is keeping Vista serviced and out of the way.  In any event, 60 x 60 maps are working out fine as long as 1.25 minutes is an acceptable wait.

Regards, Lordkarg

You might be interested to know that AT is coded in VB.NET too

The thing is that the AI calculations are so linear, that is hard to actually make use of multiple threads.

Threading is most usefull in for instance an AI running in a realtime shooter. That way the graphics can keep running and the AI can keep thinking at the same time.

kind regards,
Vic