If Firaxis would fix one thing ...

Exile_Ian

Warlord
Joined
Nov 30, 2001
Messages
199
Location
WA, USA
... it surely has to be the speed of the game.

Having now played the game since it was released, I can live with the smaller idiosyncricies of the rules and am enjoying the game immensely.

But the current game I'm playing (which has absorbed the last 10 days for me) has just about become umplayable. I'm using Marla's World Map, with 15 civs and the complexities are exactly what I was looking for. But now I'm approaching modern times, and most of the world is populated and the game play has slowed tremendously (currently something like 20 minutes + per turn).

Due to the way the program runs, its not even a case of making your moves and waiting 20 mins, since the AI will often require me to respond depending on its actions (e.g. it captures one of my cities, or a foreign civ want to speak to me). There are even significant delays during my turn depending on what I'm doing (settling a new city being an obvious example).

Its highly frustrating since I'm running a pretty speedy machine (1.6Ghz P4, 512Ram, 32Mb Video card, Windows XP).

I've even tried monitoring the system performance during the long pauses, and all I can say is that it's not memory thrashing (memory usage rarely gets above 280Mb) - its purely CPU - 100% constantly.

As many people have already pointed out, it seems that its the calculations in connection with changing cultural boundaries and their impact on cities (e.g. checking for culture based flipping) that is where all the processing effort is going. My suspicion is that the program is recalculating the impact on the whole world for every small change (even a change in population in one city).

When you compound that by having a large territory, with multiple neighbours, and the odd war or two - it accounts for the huge delays.

So what's the answer Firaxis? Is there really no way that these algoritms can be improved? Does the program really need to recalculate to such depth so often?

Sure I could play on smaller maps or with less civs - and I probably will have to do so to regain my enthusiasm for the game. But clearly the game has a major problem with the level of computation required - and I can't believe it runs significantly faster on anyone else's PC.

Please let's be sure that this single issue gets maximum attention before we get side-tracked on all the small stuff.
 
have you upped the HP of your units???

I don`t get over 5 min/turn on a slower machine.......

what does take long is combat. for some strange reason a fight that you can`t see last as long as one that you can w/o animation...... (took quite some work to find that out)
 
No - I'm running completely standard - yes I have latest patch - all I'm doing is using Marla's map, and I don't see that being the problem.

Are you running a comparable game? Huge World Map, 15 AI civs, huge number of cities? If not, then its not a fair comparison. Mine was running fine until the border got heavily conjested (and started overlapping) and its the addition of some complex wars/alliances that finally tipped me over into the 20 minutes + gameturn.

Maybe I'll post my saved game later and see how the response time is on other people's systems. I'd be really pissed if it was just my PC - but I really doubt that's the case.
 
hmmmmm

probably it`s just the fact that I never leave enough civs serious area until late in the game...... makes for fewer interactions. a lot fewer.......

I hope you find a way to get that to work faster....


are you patched? the correct 1.16f version? that one cut waiting time by roughly 2/3...
 
That'd be good if you could do that - I haven't experienced any of the problems with long turns that others seem to be having, but I don't know that I've played a huge map with 16 civs yet. I've done the step below that ("large," is it?) with 12, and it wasn't so bad. I'd like to see if my results are any different than yours.
 
I've played one huge map most of the way through, and abandoned it because it was so slow, even with animations off.

The main suggestions I've seen in cases like this are to get more RAM and defrag if you haven't. Also, shutting down all progs running in the background helps, but I do that anyway. I don't suppose this will help any, but I wanted to try.

Possibly they'll figure out something to make things run quicker in the next patch (if/when) but I wouldn't count on it, given that it sounds like a major change.

I agree that if the turns were set up differently it would make the game less of a bore when it runs slow. That is, if all the player decisions came in a lump instead of the comp asking questions, making you wait, stopping to ask another question, another wait, etc.
 
No - I'm running completely standard - yes I have latest patch - all I'm doing is using Marla's map, and I don't see that being the problem.

Marla's map is larger than the Huge map. A huge map is 180x180, her map is 204x256. Much more land, cities, units, etc.

They have been working on trying to get a mod set up so that it's impossible to settle on all Tundra and/or Desert, so that would greatly limit the number of cities on that map (since the AI settles everywhere!) and speed the game up a little.

Would like to see the saved game posted so we could compare times on different computers. But I imagine the saved game file is very large, might not be able to post it here (500kb limit), might have to post it somewhere else and just post the link to it.
 
Ah, I hadn't appreciated just how much bigger Marla's map was than a standard Huge - that explains some of it at least.

Yes I tried to post a zipped sav file before but it was over 500k - I'll perhaps upload to another site tonight and post the link.
 
Originally posted by Bamspeedy


They have been working on trying to get a mod set up so that it's impossible to settle on all Tundra and/or Desert, so that would greatly limit the number of cities on that map (since the AI settles everywhere!) and speed the game up a little.


That is a really interesting idea. Is it possible to do in the editor? I am not as interested in how much it would spead the game up as in the strategic situations concerning oil that would spring up as it is in noone's territory.
 
That is a really interesting idea. Is it possible to do in the editor? I am not as interested in how much it would spead the game up as in the strategic situations concerning oil that would spring up as it is in noone's territory.

It's possible, sort of....

If you set the requirement of food to 3 per citizen (under the general settings), and the tundra and desert food production to 0 with no irrigation bonuses. With this method if you settle a city on all desert or tundra (no other terrain types within the original 9 squares of the city), you produce only 2 food from the capital bonus, but need 3 to feed that one citizen. Result: The sole citizen starves (if it's your capital, you lose at 3950 B.C. !)

However you would need to add more food to the other terrain types, and more than just 1, because otherwise even on grassland your cities are limited to size 2 under Despositism if you can't irrigate.

edit: typos
 
Get a newspaper, magazine, or good book. Multitasking while playing helps the guilt factors.

My turns in my last game ran excessively long as well, but I never did give up. In my opinion, the complexity and 'reality' of the situation makes the game much more fun than generic maps. Its a lot more reward to complete a successfull dual pronged surprise attack from Panama & Florida against Mexico than it is to do the same thing on a generic setting.

Turning off animations helps a lot. The worst part is if you try and change governments late in the game.
 
Top Bottom