AshesoftheSingularity Forums
He did not indicate such in other topics where he discussed his results.
...and I challenge you to prove me wrong. Check out these benchmark results: These results indicate I am GPU-bound, that is, quote "If this number is near 100%, then a faster CPU would make no difference in the score". The logical inference is that a faster GPU is called for. That's the conclusion Frogboy came to <a href="https://forums.ashesofthe
AshesoftheSingularity Forums
Bummer, tests means time or money or both. I'm half convinced the benchmark is giving misleading results through oversimplification. It says 100% GPU- bound, but I don't think the GPU is the problem here. Your system, with the same card, gets better results and the difference seems to be CPU and memory. Frogboy's Results also show GPU-bound with a hyper-threaded i7 circa 2012 And his card isn't too bad. There is something screwy here. All I've been able to conclude is that
Duplicate post
[quote who="rapha320" reply="7" id="3595399"] i think it has to do with the cpu then. [/quote] Can you look at my benchmark results here: https://forums.ashesofthesingularity.com/472336/page/2/#3595397 The results indicate I am GPU bound.
AshesoftheSingularity Forums
Okay, maybe you can help me interpret my results. First off, your CPU is pretty new, one generation old at most. You also have way more memory. My CPU is three generations old (below minimum specs, actually), purchased within the last few years. But as I've been getting 40 FPS on medium I figured it was up to the task for now. The test OS is very
This astounds me. Could it be CPU makes that much difference? What CPU do you have? Are you certain you are running the same graphics settings and resolution? I paid extra attention to make sure I was.
AshesoftheSingularity Forums
Well you can't possibly know I'm wrong here. On what settings will the average person run the game? My guess is medium because I have average hardware and medium is the right mix between performance and graphics. And I'm running a DX12 capable card on Windows 10. I did a benchmark test just today and between DX11 and DX12, FPS is a wash. Yeah things will get better with more optimization, but that doesn't change that folks will still probably have to run on medium for some tim
AshesoftheSingularity Forums
At this point I do not care anymore. Frogboy mentioned something about video memory limiting terrain detail, and I'm here to say I'm happy with the terrain now, so I personally don't see a need to spend extra development resources on it unless people at Oxide/Stardock are just sitting around bored. If they do, fine. If they don't, fine. Same with barrels. My primary hope for this game is amazing game mechanics. Then AI. Then multiplayer. Then campaign/story/lore. Then mods/DLC
AshesoftheSingularity Forums
[quote who="Ticktoc" reply="28" id="3595345"] Gameplay IS more important but graphics do help and dismissing them would be a mistake. Besides, art and gfx guys are going to do art and gfx; design and sound guys are gonna do design and sound, etc. So gotta suggest things for the art guys something to do with some feedback right? [e digicons]:)[/e] That is what forums like this are for. [/quote] Yes, indeed. Don't dismiss graphics, I'm just saying the game looks darn
AshesoftheSingularity Forums
To be frank, I'd rather the devs focus on gameplay than graphics, if they have limited time and have to choose where to allocate man-hours. Graphics will catch peoples eyes for a few seconds, but gameplay will keep people playing for years (or not). I didn't initially notice the barrels weren't black. Now that I know they aren't...I still don't care. How long do I admire the look of a unit while playing a game? 0 seconds. How long do I admire the look of the terrai
I'm sure this is all well and good, but it's not something that I care about. What I care about is, does the benchmark run better under DX12 than DX11? Prior to the latest driver release, the answer for my GTX 770 was No! By 10-20%. But I re-ran the benchmarks with the latest driver: Light-Medium-Heavy-Average... DX11: 47.1 - 41.5 - 37.1 - 41.5 DX12: 45.6 - 42.5 - 37.1 - 41.4 The results are essentially a wash. Until they release a driver where
AshesoftheSingularity Forums
I see you've also re-enabled the ability for T2 and T3 units and battle groups to request reinforcements. Thanks! I found that if you build a new factory while there are still reinforcements yet to be built, the new factory will help complete the request. Nice touch. Also, "Repeat Queue"! These two alone help reduce much micro and allow me to spam units faster than I could before. Units in groups also appear to be behaving better, moving around more speedily and fl
Six bugs in 100 seconds (video unlisted): [video]https://youtu.be/e9tvdxSCeIU[/video] 1. Unit frames on units queued before factory completion remain forever. 2. Initially the Seed's action is set to building engineers. Later in the game, without my doing anything, the Seed's action changes to Global Abilities. 3. I fat-fingered 'e' when hitting 'w'. An Advanced Factory blueprint got placed on the map, though I did not actually place any
You guys, it's Haalee. Not lore buffs?
1. I think you mean right mouse button, and I agree. At first it wasn't a problem for me, but after a handful of recent instances where I didn't give an order that I'd intended to, and it took me up to a minute to figure it out, I now think something else is needed, or at least the ability to customize it. I agree with some of the bullet points, not all, and I will leave it to the devs to determine which are appropriate for their game. For the first time in this ga
AshesoftheSingularity Forums
Eh, he's one of the 3%, so he will be ignored. The science is settled, after all /sarcasm
I'm for 5, 6, 9, 13, and I guess 17. Combined these give a good look of the various aspects of the game. I assume this has something to do with advertising, perhaps screenshots for the steam page. Are you open to founder submissions?
AshesoftheSingularity Forums
I agree that if you could wait until January, you should. But since you can't, I recommend you do NOT call it beta. Don't even call it pre-beta. People have a level of expectations when you mention the word beta, even if those expectations are unfair. People have a different level of expectations when you call it "alpha", and with missing major functions, some unit behavior weirdness, and the fact that it still crashes often, you really are still more in alpha territory anyway. It'
AshesoftheSingularity Forums
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="5" id="3593946"] October 22. [e digicons]:)[/e] [/quote] Awesome!
Yeah, I've been unable to come even close to reproducing in 0.55, which is great because now I want to play the game! I will soon create a new post, with accompanying unlisted video, showing unwanted unit behavior in battle groups where units shift around and take weird paths, causing the whole group to slow down. I don't envy the person who is tasked with fixing that.
I was able to reproduce this bug in 0.51 twice using the same procedure with minimal units (3-6 T1 squads). Then the third time it didn't work. I'll keep working on it. What seems to be a common occurrence whenever I encounter this bug is that units try moving up mountains and other inaccessible parts of the map. If I can figure out how to force units into inaccessible locations, that might trigger the bug (or perhaps that is the reverse cause and effect). Also, genera
I've encountered it in 0.50, even have a video of it (unlisted) [video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzRWAI3HQ2k[/video] I'll see if I can reliably reproduce.
AshesoftheSingularity Forums
Yep, works like a charm! Well done. Hopefully that means they can now debug it fast and push 0.55 :D
Well here's the thing...you can, right now, click on the strategic map and the main window goes to that location. Just tried it. No, it doesn't change zoom level, but I wouldn't want it to. So whatever minidump was saying about, who knows.