Page 1 of 1
Just how big can the battle get and still be playable?
Posted: Thu Mar 25, 2010 4:01 pm
by Gunfreak
We have heard that the June 30th OOB won't work and that got about 160 000 soldiers or about 40 000 sprites.
But what about battles with around 100 000 soldiers, both Shiloh and Antietam hover around 100 000 troops or about 25 000 sprites.
Would those battle be playable?
Re: Just how big can the battle get and still be playable?
Posted: Thu Mar 25, 2010 4:17 pm
by norb
I think our current battles are HUGE!!! But if you want to talk about ridiculous size battles, the following affect it greatly.
1. SPRITES - these things take up too much ram. We've gotta convert to models to free up the ram. We can easily hit the 1.8gb limit on 32 bit OS with our sprites. If we want big battles, 3d models have to happen.
2. TC your troops and use events to wake them up. Thousands of men standing on the battlefield are not a big issue. Thousands of men thinking and fighting are... So you have to take the troops on the outskirts and TC them so they don't think. Then have events wake them up if the enemy gets too close. This allows a heck of a lot more of the battlefield to be occupied. Then the majority of the fighting will only occur where you attack and allow the cpu time to be focused on where you're playing rather than the entire 100,000 soldiers.
The first needs an engine upgrade, the second is in your scenario design. So we've got some work to do before we're there, but it's coming. Systems are getting faster and we're not cutting edge. So rather than focusing the cpu/gpu on the latest fx, we can use it for more men.
Re:Just how big can the battle get and still be playable?
Posted: Thu Mar 25, 2010 6:11 pm
by Jim
I have a testing scenario with about 20K per side set on a historical map. It plays with frame rates in the single numbers. However I like to have my map options turned up. If you are willing to play with a sparse historical map or on the Kansas map, then you could probably get more troops in the fight. We have not done extensive testing in this direction.
-Jim