new update3

[Hullu Hevonen]

Honestly people. Is it so important to know what's coming in the update?
You know they're working on it every day (unlike most software producers who work on 20 titles at once)
and thus made this game far more better and faster then any other game I know about..

ALso about the speed.

Ehrpjfkjsdlnsdnsd, I really not sure what to say.
Please, name me 1 game with such a huge map, with so many thousands of units, that in real-time is
so fast as SR. If I had to play a map as huge as SR, with so many units as in SR, using the civ-engine..
a "next turn" would take 1 or 1,5 week. Not to mention the RAM would virtually explode.

I ran this game on a Q8400 with an old GF7950 card and it runs just fine..
it may get a bit slower after 1970, but it still runs fine..

there's no way I can run a game like civ 5 on that machine, i tried, and gave up. Even turn 1 is literally
impossible on such a machine. It's not fair to request of BG to make Gigantic maps, with tens of thousands of
units and then complain about speed. Upgrade your systems I'd say. I now own a i7-3770k with 16gigs of ram.
I can assure you, civ5 runs now "acceptable" while SR runs like a rocket.

Those are THE 2 games I'd like to compare.. of course you can compare other games as well, but they are by far
not as advanced as these 2, that's why I like to compare these 2. Apart from the fact their game-play focus is
completely different.

But anyway, speed complaints? You can't expect to run gigantic maps with tons of units on an old E6400 with 2 gigs of RAM..

Even the best programmer in the world can't make your hardware go faster..

Yes, I agree with you, though before recommending buying new comps, consider that many players aren't from the US/west with good jobs with what they can pay for a new comp.

[TheCyab6a]

if ur looking to compare games mrgenie i can play SRCW fine for the first few years (this is starting without units btw) and after 1955 its done and over BUT i can play civ 5 all day long with no issues??????but il still play cw ant day of the weak

[Hullu Hevonen]

civ5 has much more graphics requirements than SRCW

[goulash]

Honestly people. Is it so important to know what's coming in the update?..

No its just polite and not treating customers like muppets

You know they're working on it every day (unlike most software producers who work on 20 titles at once)
and thus made this game far more better and faster then any other game I know about..

It has been way too much time between the last patch and this one and I wanna wait till it is released before presuming it is going to be some great massive improvement.

ALso about the speed.

Yes this being the biggest issue for the vast majority of users whom do not own PC's like yours

Ehrpjfkjsdlnsdnsd, I really not sure what to say.
Please, name me 1 game with such a huge map, with so many thousands of units, that in real-time is
so fast as SR. If I had to play a map as huge as SR, with so many units as in SR, using the civ-engine..
a "next turn" would take 1 or 1,5 week. Not to mention the RAM would virtually explode...

There is not such a game granted but just because a game is unique, it does not give excuses for releasing it when the majority and I mean the majority of players will have this massive slowdown about 10 years into the game.

I ran this game on a Q8400 with an old GF7950 card and it runs just fine..
it may get a bit slower after 1970, but it still runs fine..

there's no way I can run a game like civ 5 on that machine, i tried, and gave up. Even turn 1 is literally
impossible on such a machine. It's not fair to request of BG to make Gigantic maps, with tens of thousands of
units and then complain about speed. Upgrade your systems I'd say. I now own a i7-3770k with 16gigs of ram.
I can assure you, civ5 runs now "acceptable" while SR runs like a rocket.

I would like to see a youtube vid of SRCW running like a rocket in 1970 so please enlighten me as I have similar system and it gets bogged down. And I am sorry but either you took 5 months to play the game on your old system or you are saying we are all liars because we have issues with the gamespeed. I know I know, I bet you played Vatican City eh ?

Those are THE 2 games I'd like to compare.. of course you can compare other games as well, but they are by far
not as advanced as these 2, that's why I like to compare these 2. Apart from the fact their game-play focus is
completely different.

But anyway, speed complaints? You can't expect to run gigantic maps with tons of units on an old E6400 with 2 gigs of RAM..

Even the best programmer in the world can't make your hardware go faster..

So make it bloody obvious for the buyer that they cant run the game your promoting (Industry thing not a BG thing)

Look SRCW is a great game but it sucks with speed slowdowns (even on good systems) and the devs have acknowledged this. I am not convinced your are being totally honest regarding the runs like a rocket statement (unless you are nuking everything on the map). If the majority of players are running middle of the line PC's then aim the game to be playable on middle of the line PCs?

Not everyone has i7 16 gig systems and if you need such a system to enjoy this game, it should be stated in min / reccomended specs (Industry fault again not BG's). When people look at the gameplay vids before buying etc, they presume that the graphics are dated and mistakenly think they can run such a game on their systems easy peasy. That and min spec details such as below will give a player the wrong idea that this game is not so intensive.

I tell you what, why does BG not release a demo for their next game that is a scenario similar to the state the game would be at 1970 in SRCW. Lets see how many customers that one brings in !!!!!!

If anyone wants to post a 1970 game vid (with units) that shows a day going faster than 1 min, please post link. And please do not use a country such as Monaco or Vatican City.

Anyway, stop ruining it, I want to keep the pressure on

Regards

(the Mob)


System Requirements
Operating system: Windows XP/Vista/Windows 7
Processor: Dual Core or greater Recommended
Memory: 1 GB RAM
Hard disk space: 1 GB Hard Drive Free
Video card: Direct-X 9.0 Graphics with at least 32MB
Sound: Direct-X Compatible Sound
Controller support: 3-button mouse, keyboard and speakers
Up to 16 players in Multiplayer over LAN or Internet

[Hullu Hevonen]

There have been people claiming the majority of players prefer the update like this or that, now I created a poll to really find out who's claims are more truthful , go vote!

[mrgenie]

Regards

(the Mob)

Oh no, the mob? Help!!!

No, but seriously, of course you have your point. I did notice when I start cheating wars, and 50 countries are at war simultaneously, the game gets slow. But, I take that for a fact as the AI must be doing zillions of maths during wartime.

Usually my maps are pretty pacifistic. 1 or 2 wars at a time.. and the game keeps very playable. Like I said, I must start cheating wars to make sure the game gets slower.

But, I can imagine if you're playing maps where everyone is fighting everyone, things can get slow

[SGTscuba]

Regards

(the Mob)

Oh no, the mob? Help!!!

No, but seriously, of course you have your point. I did notice when I start cheating wars, and 50 countries are at war simultaneously, the game gets slow. But, I take that for a fact as the AI must be doing zillions of maths during wartime.

Usually my maps are pretty pacifistic. 1 or 2 wars at a time.. and the game keeps very playable. Like I said, I must start cheating wars to make sure the game gets slower.

But, I can imagine if you're playing maps where everyone is fighting everyone, things can get slow

Btw what settings do you put for the scenario when you play it for it? (do you just have the default ones and then play as that?)

[Stavros]

i do have a question tho, maybe this has been said before, but spies don`t work on my game, even starting a new game, I click on the mission and then the location but it doesn`t put a spy there and the number of spies doesn`t change...this seems to have only happened since the last update, i remember it did work when i first got the game on release. Ive also tried with different nations and get the same. Is this something that might be addressed in update 3, (if anyone has any idea)?

[goulash]

But, I can imagine if you're playing maps where everyone is fighting everyone, things can get slow

What other game would a Angry Mob man play . Now I am sitting here thinking up a new Ipod game to replace angry birds = the Angry Mob.

Angry Mob game Features

Choose from multiple game develoment companies,
Pick parts of their project teams e.g. publishers, designers, programmers, Forum Moderators, and last but not least the most important ones, the grand old marketing department.
You play the Angry Mob,

Multiple arsonal at your disposal including:-

1. Fabricated IT and programming background
2. Fabricated guise of been playing games since ZX81 (good for the teens)
2. Troll baiting
3. Blow minor bugs out of proportion syndrome,

But wait, this is no ordinary game as the game devs have their special powers too,

1. Pre Launch hype knowing its a mess (just get it to Gold status)
2. Keep em quiet minor patches,
3. We are a small company QQ,
4. Nuke em with the "we aint saying nothing" (this is a very powerful weapon)

Yep, move over WOW, the next MMO is here. Ergh my head hurts and its time for bed

[Aragos]

All,

The issue, as noted above, with slowdowns is really two-fold.

1) Overstacking bug. Units go to nearest friendly port/etc. when a war ends, or enroute to another location, overstack and begin doing the dance of doom. Sometimes they will de-stack and continue on normally. Sometimes not.

2) Wars. When a lot of wars start, a lot of units start moving. Play a game on very low volitility and one on very high. Watch the difference in game speed.

Simply put, the issue comes up when nations go to war and start moving a LOT of units around. Every example I've seen in the boards about this all pretty much begin with "so I was at war with all of Western Europe and the USSR, and the game slowed down!" That is all about numbers of units, pathing, etc.

Example: In a recent USA game, I decided to take game speed into my own hands, and declared war on Netherlands, France and the UK (well, and I wanted their American colonies as well...). I then wiped out most of their transports, warship and every plane I could find. Result? Game ran like lightning. Fewer units, less chance of destack bug.

[Fistalis]

All,

The issue, as noted above, with slowdowns is really two-fold.

1) Overstacking bug. Units go to nearest friendly port/etc. when a war ends, or enroute to another location, overstack and begin doing the dance of doom. Sometimes they will de-stack and continue on normally. Sometimes not.

2) Wars. When a lot of wars start, a lot of units start moving. Play a game on very low volitility and one on very high. Watch the difference in game speed.

Simply put, the issue comes up when nations go to war and start moving a LOT of units around. Every example I've seen in the boards about this all pretty much begin with "so I was at war with all of Western Europe and the USSR, and the game slowed down!" That is all about numbers of units, pathing, etc.

Example: In a recent USA game, I decided to take game speed into my own hands, and declared war on Netherlands, France and the UK (well, and I wanted their American colonies as well...). I then wiped out most of their transports, warship and every plane I could find. Result? Game ran like lightning. Fewer units, less chance of destack bug.

Not to mention #2 inevitably leads to #1

[forumname]

goulash,

I have several games that run like fire post 1970. (less than 1 minute days).

The latest are as China, and the US.

The US game DID have the destack bug, but I cleared it myself through invasion of Great Britain.

[goulash]

Well its been a while since I actually played so cant remember how much of 1 & 2 was happening at the time. I just recall terrible slow down.

It is probably bet I wait for update 3 before trying another game anyway. I may try and be a bit more freindly with other nations also

I just hope update 3 has some good fixes cos I am twitching to play it again.

forumname thanks for your reply and by the way what system are you using?

May be that a sticky should be put up to warn players not to be too eager to go to war with everyone as this effects their gaming experience.

[forumname]

I'm on a core i7 2600, 8 gb ram, Radeon 57xx with 1gb onboard.

The destack issue isn't as much about starting wars, as it is with transit treaties. England has like 40+ allies, and owns many colonies when the game starts.

When 17 of Britain's allied countries all try to "strategically station" 10 or 20 divisions on a one hex island, such as Diego Garcia...it actually creates the "bug", (which actually happened in my current game), causing 2.5 minute days.

Blow them all up, and the "bug" is gone, and you get back to 30-45 second days.

Any small landmass owned by a country with many allies (with transit treaties or better) has the potential to create this situation. In my current game (1980) I just broke ties with south korea, Iran, and Belgium, because they all wanted to start stacking units on Hawaii and Diego.

If you like, send me a pm with an email address. I will gladly zip and send you a savegame that is post 1970, if you want to see how your system does with it.

[mrgenie]

if ur looking to compare games mrgenie i can play SRCW fine for the first few years (this is starting without units btw) and after 1955 its done and over BUT i can play civ 5 all day long with no issues??????but il still play cw ant day of the weak

I think I mentioned to compare map-size and unit numbers didn't I?
Of course, in Civilization 5 at turn 1 you have 0 units. You can start SR 2020 CW with 0 units as well.

In a late game however, in Civ 5 you end up having something between 1000 and 2000 units on the biggest map on vanilla civ 5
And yes, I am c++ coder myself and did debug that to figure those numbers

The amount of hexes in civ5, I didn't count them, but 180x120 i'd guess... that's 20.000 tiles..
I didn't count the hexes in SR 2020 CW neither, but how many are there? 400*600? quarter of a Million, half a Million?

You can't say in a strategy game:" twice as many tiles = 4 times as many calculations for path finding math"
Unfortunately the practice is more like: twice the size of tiles = 16 the number of calculations for path finding..
Do that with the amount of units in SR 2020 CW .. late game, 10.000 units?

So we have a map that is at least 10 to 20 times bigger, like 160 to 320 times more calculations..
with 6-10 times more units at least..
So, that makes a CPU demand of 1000 to 2000 times more..

Can you even imagine, how playable civ would be with these numbers? With such a huge map, so many tiles, so many path finding possibilities to go over, for so many units...

That's the main reason why they limited units and map size in civ 5..

But yes, of course there are bugs in SR 2020 CW. No one is denying that. And sure the path finding bug eats CPU..
yes, BG can at least improve 100% of the code, but let me tell you 1 thing, programming a game, every single line can be improved always..
like I said before, developing a massive game as SR, you're never done programming.. even if everything at some point works.. in view of the user works, there are still tons of bugs in the background.. even if you polish out them (doubt that's even possible) but even if you get to the point to fix every single bug in such a gigantic game, you can start rewriting to optimize everything and make it go faster.. clean out code, etc..

for a huge gaming company SR is a huge performance.. take that into account, and the fact that BG is in fact small, and not a huge gaming company.. the work they've done is an example for all software producers. So few resources, so much quality..

I take the bugs for what they are, since nothing is perfect. The game is well playable, and I'm sure once this month the new version comes out, they polished out the bugs, I'm pretty sure of that..

And the fact that this update took them so long, makes me thing they didn't simply fixed bugs, but did redesigns on large parts of the code.