65 replies to this topic

[Invadious]

My minimum recommendations are a 3.0 GHz CPU, 1.5 GB RAM, and 256 MB GPU RAM. The GPU itself has never really been an issue because at least you can tweak settings for that - the one I was using actually died so I'm currently using my old one, a GeForce 6600 GT 256 MB, and it works fine on max settings, although I usually keep anti-aliasing at half since the downgrade. If you don't have the CPU and RAM though, I wouldn't even try GFFA.

Well, these are my specifications: AMD Sempron 3400+ (1.8 GHz ), 512 MB Ram & NVIDIA GeForce 6150 LE. If I close every program on my PC and start up PR 1.0 GFFA it doesn't really lag that much, and if I start skirmish it doesn't lag at all. So I think it has more to do with the game than your PC. My setting in-game aren't that high, but if you have a really fast PC, I think it should be possible to play this game without lag if you just keep your settings low enough.

[Phoenix Rising]

I'm curious to know what the lead is?

We think that EaW is manually capping memory allocation to 1 GB maximum for some reason, but don't have enough evidence to prove it just yet. If that's the case, it's probably forced to go to virtual memory, which is brutally slow. If the cap exists, either because of EaW itself or from some other kind of limitation, then we need to find out how to remove or increase it and the lag problems might go away. If anyone could corroborate next time they're in GC, it would be helpful.

Good job again Ghost...I have to say though, I'm scared to see Hapes By any chance could you take some screenies of some battles with these planets, some descriptions etc.???

There were screens in the last post of Columex.

-Could we sell older ship models

You already can...? If you're talking about selling tech, there's no reason to with the new stations - there shouldn't be UI problems.

-Also could we have multiple research centers to make it go faster the researching???

No. I do this on purpose.

-Now since land is coming near, are you thinking of putting up Jedi/Dark Jedi Academies on certian planets to train force wielders

Too early to say.

-Also, for hero units on the Alliance side, I have found that it is unfair to the Imperial side, since the Imperial land heroes get a 1.0 class hyperdrive when the Alliance land heroes get a 2.0 class hyperdrive

Heroes will probably change quite a bit when ground upgrades are accounted for.

-Finally what about Csilla, any thought of bringing that in finally

Too late for new planets - GFFA is nearly done, as the post says.

[A1Dasdfsdkli4r2]

Well This all sounds very interseting. Can't wait to have to actually Fight for pirate, or I should say, Independant planets. Sucks that your main mapper is out of commision. can't wait to see it .

[Kaleb Graff]

The expanded maps were in PR enhanced. I'll try to get a map pack ready for 1.1, so you don't have to replace everything.

[Casen]

The expanded maps were in PR enhanced. I'll try to get a map pack ready for 1.1, so you don't have to replace everything.

Yes, that's what I meant. Those maps made using the huge ships less ridiculous.

[TheEmpire]

We're following up on a promising lead as to why it lags as much as it does in GC. Other than that, I've removed the CSA, but GFFA proper will probably just require a better-than-average PC to play efficiently (why there are four other GFFA-style campaigns to choose from). My minimum recommendations are a 3.0 GHz CPU, 1.5 GB RAM, and 256 MB GPU RAM. The GPU itself has never really been an issue because at least you can tweak settings for that - the one I was using actually died so I'm currently using my old one, a GeForce 6600 GT 256 MB, and it works fine on max settings, although I usually keep anti-aliasing at half since the downgrade. If you don't have the CPU and RAM though, I wouldn't even try GFFA.

I just meet the requirements for GFFA. Yes!

[Phoenix Rising]

I just meet the requirements for GFFA. Yes!

In theory, at least. If EaW can't access all of your memory, then no one does .

[bob345]

how much different would the GFFA light be from the regular and how much smoother would it run
and would it beable to be played wit 1.6 GHz CPU

Thanks

Edited by bob345, 30 November 2008 - 01:55 AM.

[Tropical Bob]

I don't think I've tried playing GFFA on my new computer yet. I've been involved with life and other games.

I'll see what I can manage tonight with my 2.1GHz, 4GB RAM, and 256MB video. And I'll also see what my RAM allotment is.

[Phoenix Rising]

how much different would the GFFA light be from the regular and how much smoother would it run

It's not totally done yet, so that's up to the public to find out! Obviously we don't have the resources to do professional benchmarking.

[bob345]

thanks
would a 1.6 GHz CPU beable to handle most campains without the game crashing

Edited by bob345, 30 November 2008 - 08:47 PM.

[El Danny]

Hopefully with the realise of 1.1 this mod will finally get the respect it deserves from the comunity.

[Phoenix Rising]

would a 1.6 GHz CPU beable to handle most campains without the game crashing

If you can run TC and OSH on v1.0, you'll be able to run them on v1.1; those haven't changed much. As for the smaller GFFA-style campaigns, I'd hope so, but can't say for sure, since it's only been tested on higher specs so far.

Hopefully with the realise of 1.1 this mod will finally get the respect it deserves from the comunity.

Well, meh, that's not so important - as long as someone enjoys it. However, I do think we need to branch our fanbase out beyond just the EaW community to groups like the Fleet Junkies and so on. I'll try to pick up advertising after v1.1, but if there's anything you guys can do to help, it'd be appreciated. This is important in order to be able to recruit the right people to help us (especially with respect to Land).

[bob345]

Thanks

atleast i can play TC and OSH, but it could be luck that they work, happened with Forces of corruption and my old graphics card

I hope I can play the new versions of core worlds, outer rim, and mid rim, and maybe GFFA light
they seem like some of the best campaigns. Hopefully my CPU strength being to weak just cause extreme lag

Edited by bob345, 01 December 2008 - 02:18 AM.

[Tropical Bob]

Well I ran GFFA a bit to see what the RAM stuff came out to. Note that all of this includes the CSA AI turned on (I repeat: CSA AI is on), and my computer specs can be seen a few posts above.

I wasn't able to play for too long, since i have to head off to work, but here we go! I didn't really notice any unbearable lag. Most of the lag I experienced was transitioning between the battle aftermath screen and the galactic map, and when about 10 ships were produced at the same time. Some minor little hiccups appeared here and there as the game slowed down a bit, but those were infrequent. Anyway, here's what I collected:

Desktop: 1.15GB
PR Menu: 1.65GB
GFFA Start: 1.82GB
Week 10: 1.87GB

So my RAM usage didn't go up that much. I didn't even reach the 1GB mark for the program that you mention, though that could come later, I suppose.

[Phoenix Rising]

Thanks - yeah, we decided the 1 GB watermark was just a coincidence of our limited pool of hardware. AI doesn't actually seem to be an issue by itself, but number of planets does. Still trying to figure out why.

[Tropical Bob]

Thanks - yeah, we decided the 1 GB watermark was just a coincidence of our limited pool of hardware. AI doesn't actually seem to be an issue by itself, but number of planets does. Still trying to figure out why.

I'm not saying that the 1GB thing was false, just that I hadn't hit it yet in the short game span due to lack of time. I'll check it out in a couple days, when I don't have anything to do but study, and we all know that I'm not going to study. Running the 7 Deadly Sins mod for SoaSE can't be too much worse than running GFFA for 10 weeks with two AIs running plus my hazardously insane Action IV-class Transport construction, and it soaks up my RAM pretty much instantly. And by "pretty much instantly," I mean that it runs up more than a whole gig of usage in seconds of running the program. I think it actually increases from like 1.15ishGB to 2.65ishGB. So basically a gig and half just from loading the game/mod.

Perhaps FoC is just somehow incapable of acquiring the RAM it needs, and decides to sloth around instead?

[Phoenix Rising]

Perhaps FoC is just somehow incapable of acquiring the RAM it needs, and decides to sloth around instead?

That's essentially what we thought, but we've since gotten conflicting data on the subject. Specifically, increasing the priority for the FoC process appears to allow it to allocate more memory, but it doesn't seem to significantly improve performance. At any rate, that would point to it being an OS issue rather than anything else.

[Tropical Bob]

Perhaps FoC is just somehow incapable of acquiring the RAM it needs, and decides to sloth around instead?

That's essentially what we thought, but we've since gotten conflicting data on the subject. Specifically, increasing the priority for the FoC process appears to allow it to allocate more memory, but it doesn't seem to significantly improve performance. At any rate, that would point to it being an OS issue rather than anything else.

Oooh. I'll try that next time. I've just always hesitated to change priorities because of that whole warning message it throws in my face before I hit the okay button.

[Ghostrider]

Oooh. I'll try that next time. I've just always hesitated to change priorities because of that whole warning message it throws in my face before I hit the okay button.

Just a note - I tried bumping to High and that jumped my memory allocation from 1MB to 1.5MB ram but didn't see a performance change. I guess that this was too high a priority and mopped up too much memory for the OS / other functions.

My suggestion is to up-tweak a bit but not as much as 'High'

Ghost

Edited by Ghostrider, 05 December 2008 - 10:56 AM.