Memory usage

[Il Principe]

I've already set yup the BUG options with value defaults that should work pretty well for most people, so generally just ticking the enabled/disabled is all that most players will ever need to do.

And with nice descriptive tooltips what those values meean too. What more can one want?

 

[ls612]

Koshling said, it needs more testing before making it default. -- You know, big changes have a hidden treaty with big bugs.

Yes, that is what the SVN version is for, testing things for bugs before releases. At any rate, I think I understand how the options work now, I just want to make sure we have good defaults for most people before V33.

 

[n47]

@ls612, oh my, sure it is. But maybe let Koshling decide, is something he made ready for general use or not.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I've already set yup the BUG options with value defaults that should work pretty well for most people, so generally just ticking the enabled/disabled is all that most players will ever need to do.

Well... she said when she tried it it was a bit jerky for her when panning so I was wondering if it could be explained how to minimize that until it becomes more necessary for a stronger memory saving application.

 

[JosEPh_II]

Well... she said when she tried it it was a bit jerky for her when panning so I was wondering if it could be explained how to minimize that until it becomes more necessary for a stronger memory saving application.

Try a higher setting like 16,30 1st and see if it smooths out a bit. I noticed the jerkiness too and I run 1680x1050. As koshling said the values for each screen resolution settings will need to be refined as he was testing 1600x1050 (iirc) and came up with the 8,15 values. But I also think the amount of video ram may interact here too, just mpo though.

JosEPh

 

[Il Principe]

10,18 runs fine for me at 1920x1080, GT 640

As I understand it higher values make for smoother scolling ,but more jerkiness when jumping from one end of a continent to the other.

 

[Koshling]

10,18 runs fine for me at 1920x1080, GT 640

As I understand it higher values make for smoother scolling ,but more jerkiness when jumping from one end of a continent to the other.

The first value only really ever needs to be large enough to cover the tiles visible on your screen at any one time, at the resolution you run (from the center to the edge, so unlikely you need more than about 10 - as you scroll out it's the point at which it switches to 'obscured by clouds' at which the maximum detailed tiles are visible).

The second number controls when things are removed from memory (and so will need to be paged BACK when you scroll back to them). THAT number will impact scrolling jerkiness more, because as you scroll around an area you quickly load all necessary graphics the first time you make a tile visible (that FIRST time will have some delay of course, but it's only delay that you would have had during game load anyway previously, which is why game load is faster now), but with a larger second number won't have removed them for localish scrolling movements. This means that with a larger second number scrolling back to an area you have previously viewed will be very fast.

To see what I mean (if you have a game that does not have any memory issues) try something like (10,100).

Incidentally there are a few enhancement that could be made (though the coding would be a little bit trickier than currently) to improve matters further:

1. Change the settings to be the current first number, but instead of the second one add a slider that is more 'vague' (call it 'smoothness'). This would actually be a ratio from 1 to (<map area>/<first number squared>), which, when multiplied by the number of tiles in the page-in area, gives the number of tiles in the page-out area. With the slider at far left you get max memory saving (but jerkiness), and at far right you get minimal memory saving (nothing gets paged out) and no jerkiness
2. Instead of paging out based on a radius, page out the least recently viewed plots in an arbitrary list of paged-in plots to ensure that the total number paged in does not exceed the calculated allowed number.

The effects would be:

• More intuitive (though strictly less precise) UI
• Better behavior when you have a distributed civ that is centered in a few distinct areas (or need to regularly view a few distinct areas in taking your turn). This is because switching directly between two areas (say by minimap click) could leave BOTH paged in, even though they are far apart

 

[Faustmouse]

What about the "just switch of all improvements" solution like in Civ 3? There is a button next to the Minimap. If you klick it, all improvemts are no longer displayed. If you klick it again, they will reappear.

 

[Il Principe]

I think you don´t need too worry too much about smoothing the UI. The tooltips you already made explain what the numbers do just fine.
Maye make the long explanation a pedia entry, so people won´t have to search the forum post.

 

[JosEPh_II]

Started new game and applied Il Principe's suggested settings of 10, 18 and considerably soother scrolling.

So for what koshling has posted I should next try 8,18 and compare.

Just to make sure I understand, with how it's set up, in BUG I can change the setting at any time, correct?

JosEPh

 

[Koshling]

Started new game and applied Il Principe's suggested settings of 10, 18 and considerably soother scrolling.

So for what koshling has posted I should next try 8,18 and compare.

Just to make sure I understand, with how it's set up, in BUG I can change the setting at any time, correct?

JosEPh

Yes you can

 

[Koshling]

What about the "just switch of all improvements" solution like in Civ 3? There is a button next to the Minimap. If you klick it, all improvemts are no longer displayed. If you klick it again, they will reappear.

Because it's no just improvements. It's improvements, routes, and features. Splitting them would add complexity (and therefore likely bugginess), and it's not a useful option to have routes and features turned off!

 

[Faustmouse]

Yes to features maybe, but roads don't need to be visible all the time. How does your and your enemies empires look in the Industrial age and later? In my games, there are only very few plots that don't have routes. Only after the reasearch of a new road type this would be interesting, but then still, the routes are there, you just can SEE them, correct? And your troops would use the fastes way even if you can't see the roads?

And Features are Forests, Reefs etc, right? Image you are at peace with all civs, your workers have improved your land and you played the excact same map now for 500 turns. So you know where forests, reefs etc are. So I would use the "turn Improvements, Roads and Features off button" in the later eras if it speeds up the game and scrolling.

 

[Koshling]

Yes to features maybe, but roads don't need to be visible all the time. How does your and your enemies empires look in the Industrial age and later? In my games, there are only very few plots that don't have routes. Only after the reasearch of a new road type this would be interesting, but then still, the routes are there, you just can SEE them, correct? And your troops would use the fastes way even if you can't see the roads?

And Features are Forests, Reefs etc, right? Image you are at peace with all civs, your workers have improved your land and you played the excact same map now for 500 turns. So you know where forests, reefs etc are. So I would use the "turn Improvements, Roads and Features off button" in the later eras if it speeds up the game and scrolling.

Set the values in the current UI to (0,0) and you'll get a fair idea of what it would look like. I really don't think many people would find it a usable view.

 

[Faustmouse]

Set the values in the current UI to (0,0) and you'll get a fair idea of what it would look like. I really don't think many people would find it a usable view.

I can't try it in the next time, but I belive you.

 

[Baradar67]

Hi guys.

I've spent the last two weeks stuffing around with the civ and the MAF problem. You probably know the issues but let me show you what doesn't work.

Here's my specs.
Upgraded to 12GB of 1600Mhz RAM, triple channel
i7-920 (not clocked, yet...) on a 1366 EX58-Extreme mobo
120GB Intel 520 SSD and 180GB Intel 330 SSD.
Upgraded from NVidia GTX285 (1GB) to ATI 7850 (2GB).
Windows 8 64bit Pro w Media Center. (Clean install a month ago, don't upgrade install win 8 as there are driver issues with USB 3 and SATA)
Civ installed 2 weeks ago.

/3gb is not required with 64bit.
Using bcdedit /increaseuserva 3072 or 4096 does nothing
Checking the civ exe has /largeaddressaware set did nothing (of course it was set in BTS)
Extra ram did nothing
Changing graphics card stopped the NVidia driver crashes I would get intermittently whilst playing. Alt-tabbing seemed to make this worse, the ATI card has completely stopped it. But it didn't stop the MAFs.

Watching Civ in task manager shows me that as soon as it goes over 2GB memory usage you get the MAF. This shows me BTS is not really largeaddressaware probably as there is an issue I read about where a part of the memory around the 2GB mark is retained for system use and civ does not really know about it.

I see two solutions. Recompile the civ exe so it actually works with up to 4GB RAM (this will probably never happen) or somehow allocate additional memory as a different process (not a programmer but I doubt this can be done). I hope there are other possibilities that will work.

Of course, I have given up on Civ 5 as it is still a 32-bit program and doesn't have C2C. I think it uses more than 2GB but haven't re-installed it for over a year so can't test (and don't care).

I doubt any of this is news but thought I would throw it out there. I haven't used the SVN as I prefer to just get civving and change versions every second release or so but I would be wiling to get involved with testing as we could go a lot further with the full 4GB usable. (BTW, for this to happen, users must have 8GB RAM minimum).

Once again, thanks heaps for producing C2C and continuing to extend and update.

 

[strategyonly]

Hi guys.

I've spent the last two weeks stuffing around with the civ and the MAF problem. You probably know the issues but let me show you what doesn't work.
Of course, I have given up on Civ 5 as it is still a 32-bit program and doesn't have C2C. I think it uses more than 2GB but haven't re-installed it for over a year so can't test (and don't care).
Once again, thanks heaps for producing C2C and continuing to extend and update.

Well your in luck, with the current SVN C2C is now able to use a special graphics setting, thx to Koshling, that there is no need for MAF's anymore. If you want it presently you will need to get the SVN version, if not you will have to wait till the next version comes out.

 

[Il Principe]

If you don´t want to change to SVN, use viewports which is in for a while now. Less convinient then the new way, but great for keeping the dreaded MAF at bay.

 

[raxo2222]

Thank you for nice feature.
So viewports are now obsolete?

 

[Koshling]

Thank you for nice feature.
So viewports are now obsolete?

In extreme case they might still be needed (but only in cases where the viewport would have to be smaller than the normal single screen view!), and they remain technically the only basis we have for solving the multimap issue at some point. However, for most purposes, in the current mod, they are effectively superseded by the graphics paging.