Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[meowmix]

I want to know if the FPS issue has been fixed yet for larger worlds. I remember trying to play when the new version came out but my FPS dropped to like 10 because of the global updating thing in large worlds.  Does anyone know if this problem has been fixed yet, or still have to play in small world?

[GiglameshDespair]

Not fixed.

[Eldin00]

The FPS in 40.24 is better than it was in 40.01, but most people are still getting lower FPS than they did in 34.11, and the whole 40.xx series has a bigger tendency towards declining FPS as the game goes on than most earlier versions did.

[utunnels]

Now I only create 17x17 pocket world, because I always find current world boring so I want to generate a new one.

[Shonai_Dweller]

The FPS in 40.24 is better than it was in 40.01, but most people are still getting lower FPS than they did in 34.11, and the whole 40.xx series has a bigger tendency towards declining FPS as the game goes on than most earlier versions did.

While I understand that the game Is slower than in previous versions, which is probably due to the persistant world, and that smaller worlds run faster than big ones (not actually noticed that myself, just longer autosave times, but I guess it depends on your computer), I'm not sure I understand how a persistant world whose size never changes contributes towards a slowing down of the game as you progress.

What more is it calculating of the outside world at 1050 years than at 1060?
It seems to me that the fortress gets big and complex = the fortress slows down. Is this really a world issue?

[Baffler]

The fortress is an issue, but it also tracks (at least in a fairly basic way) everything that's going on in the world around you with some omissions. That includes battles though, and births and deaths. Even with lots of wars, the general trend of world population is upward, and more population => more stuff going on => more calculations => more lag.

[Shonai_Dweller]

The fortress is an issue, but it also tracks (at least in a fairly basic way) everything that's going on in the world around you with some omissions. That includes battles though, and births and deaths. Even with lots of wars, the general trend of world population is upward, and more population => more stuff going on => more calculations => more lag.

That's a sound theory, but has it been confirmed technically?

I'm playing a kind of 'campaign game' of my own devising on a large world which involves building then abandoning or retiring a series of fortresses (amongst other things). Each fort I start seems to run at the same speed as the previous ones, and forts which get bigger and more complex slow down eventually. But no more so than when I begun with the first fort. I've a feeling that autosave is getting progressively longer (good time for a coffee break), but apart from that no real difference. And as you said, the world is much more complex than when I started.

edit: I turned off the FPS monitor a while ago so I'm only going by feeling and how much lag actually seems to effect my game, so everything might actually be grinding slowly to an fps death...

[Eldin00]

The world simulation often gets blamed for the slowdowns in .40.24, but most of the actual evidence I've seen people present seems to suggest that it's at best a minor contributor to the issue. One experiment to try (certainly not conclusive, but suggestive of an upper limit to the amount of lag world simulation might cause) would be to do this:

Set up a fort with FPS problems such that it can run for 2 weeks without any pausing/input from you. Then let it run for 2 weeks and time how long that takes. Then abandon/retire your fort and start a new one (or reclaim) in the same world. Time how long the calendar at the beginning takes to run 2 weeks worth of world simulation. Double that time to account for the fact that switching between the simulation and the fort might add extra lag. Divide the doubled pre-game time by the total 2 week time in-game, to get a reasonable upper limit to the proportion of its game time that DF was spending on world simulation, in your fortress. Call that ratio x. It follows that the lower limit to the ratio of game time that was being spent on your actual fortress instead of world sim overhead would be 1-x. So, if you take the average FPS during the 2 weeks you were measuring (FPS_avg) then the formula FPS_avg - (FPS_avg / (x-1)) gives a good guess at an upper bound to how much FPS world simulation was costing you.

[utunnels]

Well recently I started a new fort on a 1x1 map. At first the game ran smoothly. But when I had 99 dorfs/23 pets, fps still dropped to 30.
It was an aboveground fort by the way.

I had another 1x1 fort ran smoothly at 50 fps (my favorite setting). It had 21 dorfs and 50 pets. I even mined all the way through to the magma, hollowed tens of layers and grew 2 underground tree farms. Although, when cararans came and added 80 new units to the map, fps still dropped to 30.

[miauw62]

Wasn't there an issue with things not getting properly cleaned from memory when taken off the map/rotten/otherwise destroyed? IIRC there were some theories about that for DF2012. Atom smashing things presumably DID clean them from memory, and would thus be good for FPS.

[utunnels]

Well as for the 21-dorf small for, when I had 40+ GCSs locked in a small room the FPS still dropped a lot (from 50 to 30).
I don't know what the game has to check, do they have to path into your fort even if they are locked, or does the game try to figure out the relationships between them and the other 2000 dead units?

[pondicherry]

Sometimes i feel just like you, I would love to keep a fort for like 10 years... but due to lag problems that is just a dream.

[malvado]

It takes me around 3 to 4 years before FPS decrease completely from 100 to 30 ish , If I start adding magma flows , rivers , waterfalls and other stuff the fps dropps even more...
I have to say that the decrease starts making the game way too slow at one point , sure it's playable but when things starts taking longer and longer then the fun factor decreases...

[Putnam]

Not fixed.

Disingenuous. Try playing 0.40.01. It has most definitely been fixed, at least relative to that.

[Proudnerd]

Not fixed.

Disingenuous. Try playing 0.40.01. It has most definitely been fixed, at least relative to that.

this. I have a crappy i5 based laptop and i still get stable FPS with 100 dwarves.