Jump to content

ETA on terrain patch?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 411
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images



1) Will the improved terrain engine allow more control over river beds, and therefore allow fording points of user-selected depth to be added?


2)It would be nice if dirt paths did *not* deform the terrain mesh automatically in Map Editor. Roads/tracks yes; paths no.


Look forward to the update. Incremental improvements are always welcome!


Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The INITIAL scope of the new terrain engine is

  • to retain backwards compatibility with legacy maps and scenarios
  • to visualize/transfer into real geometry the "bumpiness" factor according to terrain theme settings
  • to allow patches of high resolution source data in an overall low res terrain database (provided that the user has access to those data in the first place); this is by and large a classroom version feature only by virtue of availability and map editor functionality
  • to allow modification of legacy maps to level and smooth roads
  • to provide better methods to create overpasses and highway on/off ramps

Anything beyond that is "extra". Some extra features might make it into that final version 4.0 update but at this point we're more concerned about compatibility issues than anything else. New stuff that doesn't work properly is worse than useless. As these changes go very deep into the code base we need to be extra careful to create less damage than we add useful new functionality. It is of course somewhat frustrating that things always take more time, but at the end of the day we rather accept an avalanche of "are we there yet" postings in the forum than an avalanche of messages that things don't work.


I can but ask for your patience.


Also, we may be posting some preparatory information about changes in the workflow when handling new map data, or when setting up network sessions. Some of the established routines won't work any longer (or at least won't work with true high resolution terrain data), like embedding map data in the scenario files.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well that was flagged some time ago (Sep, Oct, ?) when Ssnake talked about the development path.


Basically put your scenario file in Dropbox or similar so people can download it, at their leisure, prior to the session.


The alternative of 20+ people all trying to download a big file in the Assembly Area (with varying bandwidth) is likely to be problematic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in a test with a version where fps was not capped to 60 fps, FPS was 100 is what i meant. 

in the capped version, average FPS has increased. 

so players should experience fewer low dips in FPS and a generaly stabler framerate. 

Edited by dejawolf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

OK that post is better. The original post was too broad, so it it was removed because it is too early to know what the exact final results of the optimizations are. Also, these results have yet to be tested on a wide range of computer specifications.


The point here for everyone is that these observations were made from an experimental test version on one specific PC, with some features disabled, and everyone should not get their hopes up as to the final performance until we get closer to release date.


As long as everyone understands this then, yes, factual statement: FPS should improve, which is certainly a good thing, but by how much exactly we do not yet know. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well "VERY VERY impressed by the performance improvements" to someone who doesn't know what your setup might suggest its absolutely fantastic (and perhaps back to the sort of numbers Deja initially quoted).


As with most Internet things, it will tend to be mis-interpreted or at least interpreted in the most optimistic way possible.


Tell people you are "VERY VERY impressed by the performance" with the performance of a family car and they'll think its a super car (or say that about say a Type 209 SSK and they'll thinks its a Los Angeles SSN).


Let alone whatever changes you guys may need to make between now and when it comes out the door which might reduce performance. :)


Edited by Gibsonm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...