Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Author Topic: CRAZY fps with 33g  (Read 854 times)

Teldin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Canadian Bacon
    • View Profile
CRAZY fps with 33g
« on: December 22, 2007, 12:10:00 pm »
With a 2x2 fortress and 7 dwarves on a forest-mountain-lake biome, I get regularly about 180 fps, compared to about 70-80 on the previous version in a 3x3. Whee!
Logged

Zonk

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: CRAZY fps with 33g
« Reply #1 on: December 22, 2007, 12:27:00 pm »
Good for you :-) Although you might want to cap it at 150 FPS or so - things become a little chaotic when the game is too fast.
By the way, what made me post here was a little mathematical thing I noticed...
2x2 = 4, while 3x3 = 9, and 9/4 = 2.25.
A 2x2 map is 1/2.25 as a big as 3x3 map, but 2.25 times as fast.(since 80 FPS x 2.25 = 180). I didn't think the area size/FPS correlation was that accurate :-) Although I guess there are many other factors which affect FPS, unrelated to map size...It's fairly well-known flows(especially magma!)slow down a map...

[ December 22, 2007: Message edited by: Zonk ]

Logged

Mr.Person

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: CRAZY fps with 33g
« Reply #2 on: December 22, 2007, 12:31:00 pm »
quote:
Originally posted by Zonk:
<STRONG>Good for you :-) Although you might want to cap it at 150 FPS or so - things become a little chaotic when the game is too fast.
By the way, what made me post here was a little mathematical thing I noticed...
2x2 = 4, while 3x3 = 9, and 9/4 = 2.25.
A 2x2 map is 1/2.25 as a big as 3x3 map, but 2.25 times as fast.(since 80 FPS x 2.25 = 180). I didn't think the area size/FPS correlation was that accurate :-) Although I guess there are many other factors which affect FPS, unrelated to map size.</STRONG>

I'm 90% certain FPS doesn't work that way.

Logged
Youtube video of the year, all years.
Quote from: dragonshardz on March 02, 2011, 08:15:07 am
Hmm...I've never been a big fan of CCGs - I mean, I did and still do collect Pokemon cards, but I never got heavily into the battling and trading thing.

By definition that makes you a fan since you still buy them.

Zonk

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: CRAZY fps with 33g
« Reply #3 on: December 22, 2007, 12:34:00 pm »
quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Person:
<STRONG>

I'm 90% certain FPS doesn't work that way.</STRONG>


I know. It was just a weird coincidence. I think the FPS is mainly based on the number of creatures - with smart ones with thought and tasks slowing down the game more, on the map size and on flows. A bigger map probably gets you more animals, which I think is the main factor in slowing down.
Logged

DDouble

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: CRAZY fps with 33g
« Reply #4 on: December 22, 2007, 02:54:00 pm »
Have you seen the movie 23, with Jim Carrey?

Anyway, if animals play a role, I would assume that a glacier map would be best for FPS.

Logged

Zonk

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: CRAZY fps with 33g
« Reply #5 on: December 22, 2007, 05:48:00 pm »
Haven't seen that movie, reading about it on wiki just out of curiosity...are you suggesting I'm a number-obsessed guy   :D ?
I was just noticing an interesting coincidence.

By the way, yes, glaciers maps would be faster. Marshes and swamps also have few animals, at least in the unmodded game. The slowest possible map would be one that has magma and lots of animals.

Logged