Doesn't "show enemy moves=off" do the same thing?
New to Cave
- Thread starter mbrady10
- Start date
Doesn't "show enemy moves=off" do the same thing?
No, not at all. That just stops it bringing the enemy into view and moving them. The AI turn time reduction stops all animation activity (e.g. - puffs of smoke, workers digging, etc.).
civhelp121
Prince
If the main bottleneck is graphics, perhaps the graphics card is the bottleneck, although tbh I'm not clear on how intensive C2C is on the graphics card.
Civ4 engine is crazily intensive for what it is. One of the most intensive games out there for some reason. If you have utilities to track your GPU temperature run them - CiV IV will push them through the roof more than any other game I know.
My graphics card is a amd 7800 series, so not sure if this is good enough for caveman. In my current game I am 2200 turns into a 14000 turn gem game, with most options enabled. Turn times are now around 30 secs, with ai fast turns ticked. I would really like to get to the bottom of whatever is the cause of the problem as playing large civ mods (as well as x3 mods) is the sole reson I spent 1100 dollars.
What makes you think you have a graphics card issue? 2200 turns in, assuming you're using one of the larger map sizes, then 30 seconds for AI processing sounds like about what I'd expect (2200 turns in is about late classical right??). That's pure CPU for the AI. Unless you're automating pretty much everything it should be a 30 second AI turn but a significantly-longer-than-30-second human turn by then, so the active ratio should be ok. Is that not the case? Do you automate most units/cities? (which would make the human turn a lot faster and therefore make the waiting-for-AI time a larger part of the whole)
Sorry I was not more clear. 2200 turns into a 14000 turn game, on a GEM map, with me just getting out of prehistoric era, best ai's about 15 techs ahead (emporer level), with all civ's (there is still 50 odd left) having 6-12 cities. About my card, I just thought that because the ai faster turn option made such a differnece, then the graphics were where the bottleneck was.
Nah, the graphics overhead per turn is broadly constant, whereas the AI overhead increases progressively with unit count, city count, etc., so at the start the graphics dominates and the minimize turn time option has a big effect, but later on the AI calculations dominate, and the option has less relative effect.
JosEPh_II
TBS WarLord
Even with REV On and revolts happening all the time does our DLL support 50+ Civs now?
JosEPh
Even with REV On and revolts happening all the time does our DLL support 50+ Civs now?
JosEPh
No, but the TREV code has always been aware of the limit and won't attempt to crate a 51st
strategyonly
C2C Supreme Commander
The graphics card is a darn good card, i only have a Series 7500. *See attached) You cant get a much better one at this time.
And if you look at what difference there is, there isn't that much performance for games better.
JosEPh_II
TBS WarLord
Well 2200 turns into the game even on Eternity with ~48 AI is a CPU nightmare. And to only have a 30 sec EoT wait is superb, even on mbrady10's comp.
I really think there needs to be a Big disclaimer posted in the FAQ about number of Civs and their correlation to EoT wait time. Just to make players aware that a single thread 32 bit processing engine can only handle so much data in any "reasonable" amount of time.
JosEPh
Taxman66
King
It would be nice to have a BUG option where we could limit the number of CIVs (to a number <= 50 for less powerfull computers), so that we can still play with the other option that allows Barb cities to turn into CIVs to get up to the limit/replace dead CIVs.
Randomness
...
That is a rev option, it just doesn't show up in the BUG menu for some reason...
That great to hear. I was never really complaining about turn lenghth, I was just worried that my new computer was not up to par. Your comments area actually put my might at ease.
Similar threads
